Document information

Physical location:

RBG Kew, Kew correspondence, Australia, Mueller, 1858-70, f. 380, 36. 69.04.17

Plant names

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to George Bentham, 1869-04-17. 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/69-04-17>, accessed September 11, 2025

17/4/69
I have not very much to report, dear Mr Bentham, beyond the despatch of the last
Dicotyledoneae

Search for Dicotyledoneae in

in two large cases by the Anglesey. You need not be alarmed by the quantity of the material. The plants to a great extent are bulky, and I have spent much time to make the examinations & sorting so careful, as to encroach not severely on your own time. I hope the Rev. Mr Leighton & the Rev. Mr Berkeley will timely look over all the Fungi & Lichens at Kew, for the Australian Flora. Mr Mitten would probably help in the mosses. The more observers of special experience we can get to work on these plants, the more likley we will have excellent material for constructing the cryptogamic volume.
1
No such volume was published as part of the Flora australiensis project.
What a blessing we have such splendid elucidation of the Algae by Harvey already. It will be well for you to secure the subsidy for the 5th vol at once from the Colonial Agent, as it was saved out of my votes for 1868, and as it might be well to close the accounts thus far in our books here. The vote is not specially placed on the estimates, & thus I do the best I can to secure it always timely. Death might befal me, and then some difficulties would arise to obtain the subsidy in the manner, hitherto adopted, & special arrangements would require to be made.
Always your regardful
Ferd. von Mueller.
2
The following text is filed at f. 36. It is identified as to Bentham by the content, and is dated on the assumption that the note may have been an enclosure. It must have been written close to the time the case containing the collection of Pimelea species was sent to Bentham, 12 April 1869 per Anglesey (Notebook recording despatch of plants to Kew for Flora Australiensis, RB MSS M44, Library, Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne). The date is further supported by the date of publication in B69.06.03 of four new Pimelea species on pp. 2-7 and Drymispermum clerodendron on p. 1.
Meissners Pimeleae
3
Pimelea species were reviewed in Meisner (1857a), pp. 496-518.
have considerably decreased in number after my review of the species.
4
B69.06.03, pp. 2–8.
In several instances I regard as varieties plants placed by the Basel Professor in different divisions of the genus. At the whole I think I have shed good deal of light on these plants, but the final elucidation must rest with you, as you have access to still more additional & particularly authentic specimens
The tendency of the leaves to turn inward or outward along the margin is as important for distinguishing the species of Pimelea as it is for those of
Hibbertia

Search for Hibbertia in

&
Pultenaea

Search for Pultenaea in

.
It seems to me, that
Pimelea hispida

Search for Pimelea hispida in

, P. rosea, P. lanata, P. decussata are all varieties of one species (P. Brownii) They form all pretty plants distinct to the eye of a gardener, but are in reality I believe not species. If they differ specifically then the real characteristics escaped my view, nor are they ever pointed out by any writer. These plants certainly do not differ in the notes given by RBr & Meissner.
5
Pimelea were treated in R. Brown (1810), pp. 359–62.
Perhaps you have an opportunity to examine living plants at Kew.
6
M did not discuss these species in his treatment of Pimelea in B69.06.03, nor did he publish P. brownii. In his treatment of Pimelea, Bentham (1863-78), vol .6, pp. 1-35 did not follow M's advice to sink these species into a new P. brownii.
We have 2 (if not 3) species of
Drymisperma

Search for Drymisperma in

.
The new species since 1856 do not make good the reductions. All Australia seems to possess about 60.
7
‘The new ... about 60.’ Is a marginal note on front of folio. M presumably refers to the number of Pimelea species he recognized; Bentham (1863-78), vol. 7, pp. 1-5 recognized 67.