The correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller: Melbourne bot Garden ¶ 27/3/73 ¶ ¶ I ought to mention to you, dear Dr Hooker, that the articles sent by me to the London Exhibition (chiefly chemical productions from woods) might readily be secured ...

Document information

Physical location:

RBG Kew, Kew correspondence, Australia, Mueller, 1871-81, f. 84. 73.03.27b

Plant names

Bartlingia
Search for Bartlingia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Laxmannia
Search for Laxmannia in
Petrobium
Search for Petrobium in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to Joseph Hooker, 1873-03-27 [73.03.27b]. 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/1870-9/1873/73-03-27b-final.odt>, accessed June 4, 2026

Melbourne bot Garden

27/3/73

I ought to mention to you, dear Dr Hooker, that the articles sent by me to the London Exhibition (chiefly chemical productions from woods) might readily be secured for your Museum on application to Mr Bright, the Commissioner for Victoria

Charles Edward Bright. This sentence is marked with a cross in the margin. See the entry for 12 November 1873 in RBG Kew, Museum Entry Book, Kew, 1861-79, p. 357.

Will anything be published specially on Dr Kirk's collections from Kilimanjaro, or will they merely be inserted into the general material for Olivers work?

Oliver (1868-77); see also J. Hooker (1875a), a paper read on 19 June 1873 that outlined the collection made for Kirk by 'the Rev. Mr New'.

I suppose Mr Bentham restored Forster's and suppressed RBrown in favor of , as indicated by me in the 7th vol of the fragmenta. Pfeiffer has made no change.

Pfeiffer (1873-4) was issued in parts of 80 pages (TL2), but not consecutively. M could have seen that was not given as a synonym in the entry for , vol.1(1), p. 370, in a part issued before 14 June 1872, and as a synonym for in vol. 2(1), p. 44 in a part issued before 12 July 1872. His comment in M to J. Hooker, 18 May 1873, that he had seen only the early fascicles implies that he had not seen the entry for , which listed as a synonym, in vol. 2(1), which was announced in Botanische Zeitung, 21 February 1873, p. 127.

Bentham, in Bentham & Hooker (1862–83), vol. 2, part 1, p. 355 (1873) retained , treating Forster's as a synonym. He later (Bentham (1863-78), vol 7, pp. 63-4) explained his reasons for departing from nomenclatural priority, writing: 'The genus [ , R. Br] is limited to Australia. F. Mueller, Fragm. vii. 88, [i.e. B70.04.01] proposes to restore the name of to the Composite genus , and to give the present one the name of , but this disturbance of a long adopted nomenclature would appear to me to be productive of much confusion, without any corresponding advantage'. M persisted with in his Census, B89.12.03, treating as a synonym.

It must be very pleasing to you to see Botanic Magazine enter on the seventh thousand!

Plate 6000 of the Botanical magazine was printed in vol. 98, 1872.

What a noble monument of your and your fathers industry

With kind regards

Ferd. von Mueller