Document information

Physical location:

RBG Kew, Kew correspondence, Australia, Mueller, 1871-81, ff. 15-16. 71.11.00b

Plant names

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to George Bentham, 1871-11 [71.11.00b]. 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/71-11-00b>, accessed September 11, 2025

1
On the basis of the postscript the letter is dated to late November 1871 as the earliest that it could have been written. Rangoon struck a rock while leaving Galle Harbour on 1 November 1871: 'All lives were saved, but the whole of the Australian mails, the cargo and the passengers' baggage were lost' (Argus, 27 November 1871, p. 5). No earlier report of the loss of the vessel has been found in Australian newspapers.
The interference for 2½ years with me in my Department, dear Mr Bentham, has disorganized all work in the establishment here, and involved such enormous loss of time, that even now the supplemental
Monochlamydeae

Search for Monochlamydeae in

are not yet quite arranged for you. I will however hasten to get them away within the next weeks, so that they may still be timely utilized.
You will have received from Mr Verdon or Mr Childers the contribution toward the 6th vol, as regards fund; at all events it is available for you.
I look with intense delight forward to the new volume of genera!
2
Bentham & Hooker (1862-83). Part 1 of vol. 2 was published in April 1873.
What a treasure of information it will be; how it will ease the work of all generations to come! If I cannot keep up supplies, I trust you will not be impatient, as I have by this mail explained all my difficulties to Dr Hooker.
Do you prefer the supplemental species to the 5 volumes first, or will you finish the 6th vol with
Orchideae

Search for Orchideae in

. I do not care, that the latter should be rendered accessible to G. Reichenbac[h] after the manner in which he lately behaved to Mr Fitch and myself.
3
Reichenbach (1871) criticized M's judgements, for example in the entry for Dendrobium canaliculatum asking sarcastically at the end ' Woher schloss das Herr Dr. Müller?' [How did you conclude that Dr Müller?] (pp. 49-50). Reichenbach effectively accused M of incompetence in the entry on Bolbophyllum shepherdii, writing ' Wir rathen dringend, in Zukunft die Exemplare schön aufzuweichen und zu analysiren' [We strongly advise in future to carefully soften and analyse the specimens] (p. 52). He described Fitch's illustrations as being pretty but inaccurate (p. 62), a view elaborated throughout the text, e.g. 'Difficillimae eheu! sunt icones Fl. Tasm., quae per Fitchii digitos forsan metamorphosi phantastica ornatae' [Alas most difficult are the images of Flora Tasmaniae which through Fitch's fingers are perhaps decorated with an imaginary transformation] (p. 65). See also G. Bentham to M, 24 September 1871.
It was actually on my suggestion that he worked up RBrs
Orchideae

Search for Orchideae in

of Australia.
4
It is not known when or how M made the suggestion that Reichenbach work on Robert Brown's orchids. Reichenbach (1871), pp. 4-5, regrets the brevity of specific diagnoses in R. Brown (1810), and acknowledges the assistance of J J Bennett in providing access to Brown's specimens at the British Museum. Some specimens sent by M are mentioned in Reichenbach (1871), mostly in the section dealing with orchids not named by Brown. Later, M offered to send him orchid specimens; see M to H. G. Reichenbach, 28 May 1879 (in this edition as 79-05-28a).
It is very generous of you, dear Mr Bentham, to recognize my new title. The strict letter of the regulations forbids only the acceptance of orders & medals; but a rank, like mine, cannot come under the operations of these Office rules of Earl Clarendon, even if they were confirmed by any law, passed through Parliament.
5
For a discussion of the UK Foreign Office view of the acceptance of honours and wearing of decorations, see notes to C. Darling to the Duke of Newcastle, 22 February 1864, and for the controversial legitimacy of these rules, Lucas (2013a), especially p. 21.
I like to mention this rank, and even his Excellency in courtesy recognizes it here. I can share it with a Lady, and thus I value it doubly; it is hereditary and was not given by the Wuerttemburg house for more than 20 years to any scientific man.
It was bestowed on the day, when their Majesties of Wuerttemburg celebrated their 25 anniversary of marriage;
6
MS annotation: 13th July 1871. M was raised to the nobility of Württemberg on 6 July 1871; see Karl I, King of Würrtemberg, to M, 6 July 1871, and Lucas (2013a), p. 21.
the Queen (formerly princess Olga) being a sister of the present Emperor of Russia
So — if my cruel adversaries have been vanquished, my hopes of life may not continue for ever blighted, and late yet domestic happiness may florish for [me]
7
editorial addition. — Page torn.
Always your
Ferd. von Mueller
Probably letters from you and Dr Hooker were lost in the Rangoon.