Document information

Physical location:

RB MSS M4, Library, Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne. 62.10.08

Plant names

Preferred Citation:

George Bentham to Ferdinand von Mueller, 1862-10-08. 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/62-10-08>, accessed April 5, 2025

1862 October
begun 8th
My dear Sir,
On my return to town and to work at Kew at the beginning of this month I found your letter of 24th July
1
In this edition as 62-07-24a.
— I am very glad to hear you are pursuing the publication of your Plants of Victoria as I am anxious you should always precede me in order that full justice should be done to your labours — and yet I have at my age no time to put off if I have any hope of bringing my work to a conclusion — I hope you will continue to work up the
Leguminosae

Search for Leguminosae in

before the large families of
Myrtaceae

Search for Myrtaceae in

and
Euphorbiaceae

Search for Euphorbiaceae in

which will both take up a long time — Besides it is better not to do much in
Euphorbiaceae

Search for Euphorbiaceae in

till De Candolle's volume of that family — now I believe getting on rapidly — is ready.
2
See J. Müller (1866); for related material see also J. Müller (1864), J. Müller (1864a) and J. Müller (1865).
You speak of steeping your specimens in oil of turpentine
3
M to G. Bentham, 24 July 1862 (in this edition as 62-07-24a).
— our experience shows that it kills the larvae for the moment but when dry after a little time they eat through it without caring a rush for it. We find nothing so good as corrosive sublimate from the use of which we find no inconvenience whatever as to health any more than they do at Paris.
You caution me continually against publishing as synonyms catalogue names unaccompanied by diagnoses, and I shall avoid it except where they have got within reach of Germans who seeing specimens with the names in Sonder's herbarium or referred to in the Linnaea are sure to take them up as "species neglectae" if not disposed of in some way.
In going over the ground of our Genera
4
Bentham & Hooker (1862-83), vol. 1.
you will here and there find errors of the press or mistakes uncorrected in the Addenda. This is particularly the case in some orders which like
Malvaceae

Search for Malvaceae in

were early done in a different form and copied over and over again. For instance Hookers species of
Plagianthus sidoides

Search for Plagianthus sidoides in

is referred wrong — Here and there also working up all the species of a genus requires modifications of the generic characters verified only in a few species
You speak of
Sapindaceae

Search for Sapindaceae in

. They were done by Dr Hooker and notwithstanding that our materials are so abundant there are so many of which we had only flowers or only fruit that he was obliged to leave them in a very unsatisfactory state and adopt more genera than he would have done if he could satisfy himself of all their characters.
The dimorphous anthers of
Crotalaria

Search for Crotalaria in

and some other
Genisteae

Search for Genisteae in

have long been observed. You will find them alluded to in my paper on
Leguminosae

Search for Leguminosae in

published at Vienna 25 years ago and probably in older works on the order for I believe it was no new observation of mine.
5
Bentham (1837), p. 78, where Bentham cites Plate 2808 of W. Hooker (1827-64), vol. 55.
I have had official notice from the Australian Agent that your £100 will be paid to me after the 25th of this month.
Since my return I have been at
Malvaceae

Search for Malvaceae in

.
6
Bentham (1863-78), vol. 1, pp. 184-224. Many of the points made here are repeated in more formal language in Bentham's comments on the status of the species and M's views on their limits.
On examining in detail all the species of Plagianthus I am still more convinced of the expediency of keeping it up as a genus within the limits given in the Journ. Linn. Soc.
7
Bentham (1862a), p. 102.
(with the addition of a small species of Drummond's of which I have collected several specimens in different states from among Sidas). All the species are dioecious as well as differing from Sida in the styles —
Abutilon

Search for Abutilon in

must also be kept up as well as
Malvastrum

Search for Malvastrum in

or the whole system of A. Gray the best hitherto proposed in
Malvaceae

Search for Malvaceae in

must be laid aside — In
Malvaceae

Search for Malvaceae in

as in
Caryophylleae

Search for Caryophylleae in

the genera are not so natural as could be wished, but better as arranged by A. Gray than under any other system.
I could not at first relish the union of all the forms you had collected under
Sida corrugata

Search for Sida corrugata in

, but on further consideration I have come into your views except perhaps as to S. intricata — the others I have given as varieties — and prominent varieties have a claim to be separately mentioned.
S. Hookeriana Miq. including S. leiophloia Miq. and probably S. rupestris is quite distinct from the African S. triloba not only in duration and foliage but in the venation of the calyx and structure of the fruit.
I have had a good deal of trouble with the tropical
Abutilon

Search for Abutilon in

s — besides having to work up the corresponding Indian species which are in some confusion the Australian specimens are often very imperfect and your names in some cases misapplied in the herbarium particularly A. leucopetalum and tubiflorus. Your
Abutilaea

Search for Abutilaea in

(judging from a poor specimen of Sonders) appears to be a clandestine form of an unpublished species in Mitchell's and other collections which had been erroneously named leucopetalum whilst the true leucopetalum (agreeing precisely with your characters) has some how got your label of tubiflorum which is quite a distinct species as you point out. Of Indian ones we have from Australia A. Indicum A. graveolens A. Avicennae A. muticum (A. Asiaticum of some authors) and A. crispum.
Your Pavonia
Greevesia

Search for Greevesia in

8
Bentham treated M’s genus
Greevesia

Search for Greevesia in

as a synonym of Pavonia; see Bentham (1863-78), vol. 1, p. 207.
is exactly the Montivedean P. hastata and I find in Montivedean specimens similar dimorphous flowers although you appear to be the first to observe them. But dimorphous flowers (perfect and apetalous or cryptopetalous) are now found in so large a number of polypetalous genera that they never come unexpected.
In Hibiscus there is little to add to the number you have described. Your H. Elliotti
9
H. Elliottii?
must I fear give place to the name H. Drummondi
10
H. Drummondii?
published by Turczaninow rather sooner H. magnificus appears to me identical with H. divaricatus Grah. I quite agree with you that the common W. Australian one which you have referred to H. Pinonianus and H. multifidus is all one species but the true H. Pinonianus Gaud. is a very different one which I have only seen in Drummond's last collection from the Moore & Murchison rivers
11
WA.
and which appears almost to connect Sect.
Bombicella

Search for Bombicella in

with Fugosia and H. multifidus Paxt is the
Fugosia hakeaefolia

Search for Fugosia hakeaefolia in

Hook. — The common Swan River one must take the name of H. Huegelii Endl. (notwithstanding that Huegel says it has yellow flowers). It included H. Wrayae Lindl. as well as H. Huegelii (with purple flowers) H. Pinonianus H. Meisneri and H. grossulariaefolius of the Pl. Preiss.
12
Miquel, '
Malvaceae

Search for Malvaceae in

' in Lehmann (1844-7), treats Hibiscus in vol. 1, pp. 239-41.
H. coronopifolius Miq. Pl. Preiss is H. lilacinus Lindl. a var. I think of
Fugosia hakeaefolia

Search for Fugosia hakeaefolia in

. I am disposed to refer to Fugosia not only your
Gossypium australe

Search for Gossypium australe in

which I alluded to as the Australian sp. in Gen. Pl. but also F. hakeaefolia H. cuneiformis DC. and a new N. W. species in Cunningham's collection — I have some doubts about the stigmas of H. pinonianus Gaud. One gets too few flowers of these Hibiscus's to soak them and one is sometimes deceived about the stigmas when they only spread after the flower is fully open. Besides, no large genre are so definite as to leave no intermediate species. I do not think that Fugosia can be joined to Hibiscus without uniting all the Hibisceae into one genus which no one would agree to. Sir W. Hooker was I think quite mistaken in considering H. brachysiphonius as allied to
Fugosia digitata

Search for Fugosia digitata in

it is a true
Bombicella

Search for Bombicella in

13
i.e. section
Bombicella

Search for Bombicella in

within Hibiscus.
— the only plant I know with similar stamens is a tropical African one which I believe to be H. ferrugineus Cav.
I was glad to see the specimens of your
Unona Leichhardtii

Search for Unona Leichhardtii in

. We had already very good flowering specimens from Bidwill and others from A. Cunningham &c — the flowers show it to be a Melodorum — a genus which has pretty nearly the flowers of Unona with the fruit of Unona or
Xylopia

Search for Xylopia in

and I had described it under the name of M. nitidum for which I have substituted your name and entered it as
Melodorum Leichhardtii

Search for Melodorum Leichhardtii in

. I hope you will have sent your
Uvaria

Search for Uvaria in

s one I presume is one I had described from Macgillivray's specimen.
I have just ascertained that Hibiscus or
Abelmoschus alborubens

Search for Abelmoschus alborubens in

F. Muell. is identical with authentic specimens of Roxburgh's H. crispus which is no other than the erect state of what W. & Arn
14
Wight & Arnott (1834).
refer I believe correctly to H. ficulneus Linn.
I am in doubts about your Lagunaria. The leaves are much narrower and more glabrous than in the Norfolk Island plant and the bracts are persistent — I relied much upon this thinking that L. Patersoni had (as described) none, but I find that the very young buds have them similar to those of your plant.
Brown's
Malvaceae

Search for Malvaceae in

which I have now gone through have confirmed in good specimens some of A. Cunningham's and added three or four more.
15
The Australian collections of Robert Brown (1773-1858) were at the British Museum.
The Kent arrived this week your boxes are not yet cleared but we expect them at Kew probably on Monday. In the mean time this must be posted today Oct. 18th
ever yours sincerely
George Bentham
Dr F. Mueller
I enclose my photograph which you asked for.
16
M to G. Bentham, 24 June 1862 (in this edition as 62-06-24b). Photograph not found.