Document information

Physical location:

RBG Kew, Kew correspondence, Australia, Mueller, 1858-70, f. 124. 63.11.21

Plant names

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to George Bentham, 1863-11-21. 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//letters/1860-9/1863/63-11-21-final.odt>, accessed June 4, 2026

Melbourne bot.
Garden 21/11/63
Invoice of Case N. 19, forwarded pr ship "Result" this day.
, & -.
fasc.
1
1
(with subgenera Homalosperm. &
-. -.
1
&
1
et
-. -.
1
et aliae, supplement
-.-.
1
-. -.
2
-. -.
2
-. -.
1
et
1
Beaufortia
-. -.
1
et
-. -.
1
&
-. -.
1
-. -.
1
total fasc.
16
1
The tabulation ends 3 lines from the top of p. 2 of the letter, below which Forwarded also 13 vol of Phycologia for Reeves has been deleted.
I have reduced to as you will see in the Fragmenta.
2
B59.13.04, p. 243. Bentham (1863-78), vol. 3, p. 268, argued that despite the close resemblance, there were grounds for maintaining as a distinct genus.
About the specific identity of one Careya with the Indian C. arborea I feel not certain; the outer filaments bear all anthers, the most inner ones are short & seemingly without anthers & more slender & tender than the fertile stamens. But as the anthers early drop it is not easy to examine the flowerbuds with a view of ascertaining the presence or absence of anthers in dried specimens.
& I regard as subgenera of .
The only known to me from Australia and which without seeing the flower I brought doubtfully to (in the Report on the plants of the Burdekin Expedition)
3
B60.13.12, p. 7.
is distinct from all the numerous Indian species of the genus, preserved in our Melbourne Collection. I am thus induced to take it as a new species. If
4
The sentence ends at this point with half a sheet left blank.