The correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller: Melbourne bot. ¶ Garden 26/8/62 ¶ My dear Mr Bentham ¶ ¶ I am in receipt of your letter, dated 24 June, which arrived by last mail, and am alarmed about the apparent non-arrival of the box with Rutac...

Document information

Physical location:

RBG Kew, Kew Correspondence, Australia, Mueller 1871-1881, ff. 68-71. 62.08.26a

Plant names

Acradenia
Search for Acradenia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Alphitonia
Search for Alphitonia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Bixineae
Search for Bixineae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Capsella
Search for Capsella in
Cardamine hirsuta
Search for Cardamine hirsuta in
Cardamine pratensis
Search for Cardamine pratensis in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Celastrinae
Search for Celastrinae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Cruciferae
Search for Cruciferae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Cryptandra alpina
Search for Cryptandra alpina in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Cryptandra amara
Search for Cryptandra amara in
Cryptandra largiflorens
Search for Cryptandra largiflorens in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Cryptandra nervata
Search for Cryptandra nervata in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Cryptandra sieberi
Search for Cryptandra sieberi in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Cryptandra spinescens
Search for Cryptandra spinescens in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Draba pumilio
Search for Draba pumilio in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Emmenosperma
Search for Emmenosperma in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Euodia
Search for Euodia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Flacourtiaceae
Search for Flacourtiaceae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Gossypium
Search for Gossypium in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Halothamnus
Search for Halothamnus in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Hymenanthera
Search for Hymenanthera in
Leiosporum
Search for Leiosporum in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Malvaceae
Search for Malvaceae in
Pigea filiformis
Search for Pigea filiformis in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Pomaderris elliptica
Search for Pomaderris elliptica in
Pomaderris ligustrina
Search for Pomaderris ligustrina in
Pomaderris phylicifolia
Search for Pomaderris phylicifolia in
Pomaderris polifolia
Search for Pomaderris polifolia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Pomaderris stenopetala
Search for Pomaderris stenopetala in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Rhamneae
Search for Rhamneae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Rutaceae
Search for Rutaceae in
Sapindaceae
Search for Sapindaceae in
Scolopia Brownii
Search for Scolopia Brownii in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Sida
Search for Sida in
Sinapis hastata
Search for Sinapis hastata in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Stackhousiaceae
Search for Stackhousiaceae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Streptothamnus
Search for Streptothamnus in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Sturtia
Search for Sturtia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Terebinthaceae
Search for Terebinthaceae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Thalamiflorae
Search for Thalamiflorae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Thylachium
Search for Thylachium in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Trymalium helianthemifolium
Search for Trymalium helianthemifolium in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Urena
Search for Urena in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Violarinae
Search for Violarinae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to George Bentham, 1862-08-26 [62.08.26a]. R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora, J.H. Voigt and Monika Wells (eds), Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, <https://vmcp.rbg.vic.gov.au/id/62-08-26a>, accessed April 28, 2025

Written on black-edged mourning paper; M's sister Bertha died on 7 September 1861.

Melbourne bot.

Garden 26/8/62

My dear Mr Bentham

I am in receipt of your letter, dated 24 June, which arrived by last mail, and am alarmed about the apparent non-arrival of the box with & pr Dover Castle ; in as much as we had general commercial intelligence of the arrival of this ship in London previous to the departure of the last English mail. You will be aware from my repeated statements,

See notes to M to J. Hooker, 25 August 1862 (in this edition as 62-08-25a).

that I entrusted this particular consignment to the surgeon of the Dover Castle, Dr Thomson, who volunteered to take charge of it and see it safely conveyed to Kew. It was placed safely into his private cabin on the day of the departure of the ship.

You can readily imagine, that I am in great anxiety about this collection, for there is more danger in such box going astray in England, than being lost by the wreck of a ship; and I shall have to answer for a very responsible thing, if a chasm breaks into our Gov. collection, by the loss of any consignment entrusted to private hands. Pray do me the favor to have made all possible enquiries about this consignment & be so friendly to give every attention to the safe means of receiving the collections and their remissal. I shall not send anything again unless under bill of loading. Should the consignment really have gone amiss, there are three places where it can be 1, in the Custom [shade]. 2, in the Agents Store or 3, in Dr Thomsons care. There is great risk in these transmissions already and I will in future not add to it by placing anything into private hands. I did however point out to Dr Thomson the importance of the collection & he seemed to me a Gentleman, who possessed so much talent & love for the natural sciences, that I did not hesitate to avail myself of his aid in seeing the box away, not so much to save the freight, but because the packing of the was not completed in time to get the box entered in the ships manifest.

I repeat now, what I already mentioned by last mail, that a box with miscell small orders of (16 fascicles) was sent pr " Orwell " on the 24 April; then again 2 boxes were sent pr Kent on the 3. July, containing the & a number of other orders in all 37 fascicles, and lastly on the 23 July I forwarded pr Roxburgh Castle all the & a few other things amounting to 15 fascicles. So you have now in all 123 fasc of ! & 1 fascicle supplements will be sent by the Great Britain , which will leave next month when I shall forward to you the , , & . I shall have these orders worked up for the flora of Victoria previous to my sending them away, so that should unfortunately ever a consignment get wrecked, at least the benefit has been derived from them for the "plants of Victoria[.]"

It is natural, that in working up these plants I hold a general survey of the Extravictorian species for the purpose of studying variation as well of genera as of species. In doing so with the I came to other conclusion, then yours, and likely when you have seen my splendid set of these plants you will modify your views. I have two new sp of Pomaderris from from S.W Australia, allied to P. elliptica, one with linear subulate petals (P. stenopetala); then I have a Crypt[andra] with very elongated filaments from New England & several other species not likely in your reach. To P. elliptica I bring some dozend of synonyms & measuring variation of other species by the same (and I feel [even more]) correct standard, I fear your 75 species will sink to about 40 if not less.

M described , P. biaurita and Cryptandra longistaminea in B62.09.01, pp. 69, 73, and 64.

The new genus

M erected (E. alphitonoides) in B62.09.01, p. 63.

will interest you. It is near .

I intend waiting with the publication of the Victorian plants until I have your genera

Bentham & Hooker (1862-83), vol. 1.

and it would be a great boon to me, if you could send me proof sheets of the second volume as they are issued. At last I can send you as an Australian genus.

By last mail I received the volume of the proceedings of the L.S., containing your exquisite remarks on & allied orders.

Bentham (1862).

I was not previously aware that you had reduced , which I on independent observation likewise brought back to in the fragmenta.

As sturtii in B62.04.01, p. 6.

By this mail I send you a general chart of Australia completed nearly to Date in our Survey office. If you wish it I can send you one within the next months still more full of details of the recent travelled tracks & could make some manuscript notes to it and this chart might be prefaced to the Australian flora.

The chart was not included in Flora australiensis (i.e. Bentham (1863-78)).

The 20 No. of the Fragmenta

B62.09.01.

will be sent by next mail. There are 535 original diagnoses of species in the 1 vol., 332 in the second and about 120 in that portion of the third, which has gone through the press, thus nearly 1000 descriptions

I am much indebted for your kindness of sending me your Presidental Adress, which is replete with truthful practical remarks and in which you have so kindly expressed your self about my humble work on Victorian plants, a judgement which from your authority cannot be otherwise than gratifying.

In his first presidential address to the Linnean Society, Bentham said 'In Australia, Dr. Ferdinand Müller, the eminent Government Botanist of Victoria, has completed the first volume, comprising , of an elaborate account, in quarto, of the rich flora of that colony, illustrated by a considerable number of lithographic plates, which do credit to colonial art. This Flora is particularly valuable in showing the views in regard to the consolidation of supposed species entertained by a scientific botanist, working in a great measure upon living specimens.' ( Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London, vol. 6, pp. Lxxv-Lxxvi.)

I have not attached the same value to the generic characters of as given by yourself. Yet on genera we will ever differ as long as botanical science exists; on species we should not. I regard my malvaceous gen well marked and not combinable with & its subgenera.

I am much interested in your remark about the ;

G. Bentham to M, 24 June 1862.

is the character [on] the 1 or 2 seriate seeds of decisive generic importance? Of the innumerable gradations between J. Hook hirsuta &c in our alps I can only give even in our herbarium a very scanty material for judging. What is Brown .

was described in A. P. de Candolle (1818-21), vol. 2, p. 353, from a specimen collected by Robert Brown (1773-1858) from 'terra van Diemen', retaining Brown's unpublished name. It was listed among 'Species quoad caracteres genericus dubiae aut non satis notae'.

Is it a ? and what is ? There is most certainly but one in VDL

Van Diemen's Land [Tasmania].

& Austral. We have it in cultivation & it is common on both coasts & I have often watched the intermediate forms which I could have supplied much more copiously, had it struck me, that there could be any doubt raised to the propriety of uniting the two. If you ever get the out of the Dover Castle you will have better material before you[.] You will observe from my recent publication in the fragmenta, that I altered the name of the new genus in , finding it to belong to when I received flowers and wishing to express by the new name its climbing habit, which seems without parallel in .

M erected (S. moorei) in B62.05.01, p. 28. No reference is made to an herbarium name of in that entry. See also M to G. Bentham, 23 May 1862. The plant was sent to Kew as Lamprospermum; see G. Bentham to M, 24 June 1862. The sheet with the type specimen of beckleri at Kew (K000591211) is labelled by M ‘ Beckleri … N.g. Bixinearum | Lamprospermum volubile mihi anteae’ [i.e. my former Lamprospermum volubile]. A second specimen (K000591210) on the same sheet is labelled ' Genera [dubia !] Lamprospermum volubile | ferd Mueller | name suppressed ….' , 'Genera [dubia]’ and 'name suppressed' may not be in M's hand.

Scolopia I published as S. Brownii

B62.04.01, p. 11.

some months back, my attention having long been directed to it by Bennets note in Horsfields pl. jav. rarior.

Horsfield, Bennett & Brown (1838-52), pp. 191-2.

I received it recently also from Illawarra.

I am much pleased with your remark, that you will send the boxes back when examination of their contents is closed. As almost daily plants are received by me, it would be well to have the main collection as early as possible at hand again, so that I may work up supplemental species, which to send home it will be too late.

I regard Reisseks (my from the Avon) as a mere state of P. phylicifolia (P. polifolia Reissek) in which the carpels are more tardily deoperculated & in which the fruit is more superior. But the plant is like all alpine species vastly variable.

I reduce as a subgenus to .

Is truely apetalous?

Alph D Candolle informs me after comparison with original specimens, that I have rightly refered the plants in my herb. to DC

, C. spinescens, C. sieberi, C. largiflorens, C. nervata & C. alpina I regard all varieties of [one] species.

I conclude these hurriedly written lines with the expression of my highest regards & my best wishes for your health.

Ferd. Mueller