Document information

Physical location:

RB MSS M4, Library, Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne. 64.12.25e

Plant names

Preferred Citation:

George Bentham to Ferdinand von Mueller, 1864-12-25 [64.12.25e]. 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/1860-9/1864/64-12-25e-final.odt>, accessed June 4, 2026

25, WILTON PLACE, S.W.
London
Decr 25 1864
My dear Sir
I received yesterday yours of the 25th Oct.
1
Letter not found; no undated fragment in the Mueller correspondence at Kew contains topics addressed here.
with notes on s which I take note of in my interleaved copy. As to Supplements I see so much the very great inconvenience of supplements and addenda to supplements repeated before a work is completed that I have given up any idea of any such till I come to the last volume if I live to complete the work.
I regretted that I overlooked Sonder's paper on your in the Linnaea
2
Sonder (1856).
— but on turning to it I see it is of no consequence as the only new species he describes I had taken up under his name which I had in his herbarium.
3
Myriophyllum muelleri.
unfortunately his herbarium contained no indication of where it was published. I endeavour to collect all notices of Australian plants scattered through the periodicals published in so many different places but occasionally some one escapes me but I do not think it occurs frequently.
I have now been working hard at although with occasional interruptions from family matters. The first genus Bartlingia is nothing but in a very young state before the petals & sepals have grown out into their irregular shapes. Then it is evident that
4
Genetyllis?
and were all founded on the same generic type though on different species De Candolle did not recognise Rudges genus because the latter had overlooked the calyx segments but DC again overlooked the staminadia which prevented Lindley and Endlicher from recognising his genus The large bracteole species were added afterwards. It follows that the whole must be united under the older name of . Your makes an excellent section characterised by the calyx and comprises Lindley Meissn G. micropetala and Schuermanni F. Muell. and F. Muell. — Homoranthus (1 sp.) only differs in the calyx segments where there is no particular advantage in suppressing it I find the distinction in the anthers and ovary between and Homoranthus on the one hand and on the other quite constant The splendid genus can only be characterised by the calyx and forms two excellent sections, one with the anthers of the other with those of . and are widely different from either in calyx petals stamens ovary and seeds As to Thryptomene I have not finished it yet Of this as of other the numbers of forms and specimens sent by Drummond especially are very great and I have to dissect with care every one — that is one of every separate gathering for the internal differences are often great with close external resemblance. I quite agree that Paryphanthe goes into Thryptomene as a section. But I think that some of the Baeckeoid ones such as T. plicata and T. Maisonneuvii invalidate the generic character too much to be retained in it. Baillons genus (well described though he was mistaken in thinking that his plant was Br.) must perhaps be retained for those species which have the flowers of Baeckea with a 1-celled ovary. But untill I shall have carefully analysed every one of the large pile of Baeckeoid specimens I have before me and grouped them according to the various combinations of calyx petals stamens and ovary I find it impossible to make up my mind as to where to place such very anomalous Thryptomenes as T. elobata T. polyandra etc.
Neither Schauer's nor Meissner's grouping of appear to me to be good and there has been a confusion between the species in which the lateral cilia of the primary calyx segments are reflexed on the tube and those which have really reflexed accessory segments alternating with and outside the primary ones. The reflexed green ones appear to me to be rather appendages of the tube than real segments — They occur only in the 2d section (with Chamaelaucious anthers) and not in all of those.
I expect these to occupy me many months — especially as I shall have some work at the same time with the proofs of the 2d part of Genera Plantarum
5
Bentham & Hooker (1862-83), vol. 1, part 2 was published on 19 October 1865 (TL2).
which we intend putting into the printer's hands as soon as the Xmas holidays are over
I trust you will have safely received the supplemental Thalamiflorae before this reaches you
Ever yours sincerely
George Bentham
Dr F. Mueller