Ferdinand von Mueller

1

Letter not found. The text given here is from the Sydney mail, 15 March 1884. p. 499 (B84.03.03).

Sir, —

It would be ungrateful on my part were I to pass the generous remarks lavished by Dr. Ross on me in your valuable journal

2

M's letter is in reponse to a letter by Andrew Ross, 'The Eucalyptus', Sydney mail, 1 March 1884, p. 403, In that letter, a response to a letter by M to the Editor published in of the Sydney Mail, 16 February 1884, p. 307 (in this edition as 84-02-11d), Ross wrote that 'I regret … to think that he should for one moment have entertained the uncharitable idea … that I had intended annything like discourteous or disrespectful language towards him.' Ross then went on to again express his astonisgment that such an important case should have escaped 'Baron Mueller's usual keen observation … [and] I could not account for what seemed to me one of the strongest and best practical illustrations … of the medicinal virtues … being so overlooked or omitted.' He concluded with praise for the 'untiring labour' M had 'bestowed trying to advance botanical research'.

without some public appreciative words. From a gentleman who is entitled to so much recognition in professional life, in literary research, and in legislative functions, any encouragement or approval offered to a fellow-worker in the wide realm of science must be all the more cheering; and nothing could have been further from my intention than to give a gentleman, particularly of such standing, even the slightest of umbrage. My unacquaintance with an important therapeutic incident having given rise to this correspondence in your columns, I may be allowed now to remark that in the tenth decade of the Eucalyptography, which went here last month through the Government press, I very gladly alluded to the early record by Dr. Ross of the efficacy of eucalyptus foliage in dressing formidable wounds,

3

B84.11.02. In the entry under Eucalyptus calophylla, M reported: 'Only quite recently it came under the author's cognizance, that Dr. Andrew Ross of Molong was foremost to draw attention to the healing value of Eucalyptus-foliage, he having as far back as Dec. 1864 in a case of an Aboriginal observed the marvellous success following the treatment of a gaping abdominal spear-wound … by the mere application of the young foliage of Eucalyptus rostrata and E. melliodora'. M noted that Ross had reported the case in the daily press at the time, and 'in the Medical Gazette of Sydney in 1870'. However, no contemporary newspaper account has been found prior to the formal publication of the case (A. Ross (1870); it was reprinted in Australian town and country journal (Sydney), 3 December 1870, pp. 10-11, and Otago witness, 7 January 1871, p. 17. It was also reported as A. Ross (1891), in which he concluded 'The foregoing case is favourably referred to by Baron Ferd. Von Müller, K.C.M.G, F.R.S., … in his valuable descriptive Atlas of the Eucalypti of Australia vol. x, 1884'.

trusting that the volume now closed will be one of permanency, so that also the remarkable data establishing right of priority in New South Wales may readily be referred to in future times. Perhaps before parting from this subject I should still remark, in reference to an anonymous correspondent, that the working for science in these colonies ought to be considered always in a truly federal spirit.

4

In a letter to the Editor, Sydney mail, 16 February 1884, p. 309, 'Blue Gum' was pleased to see Ross 'take up the cudgels for New South Wales' and argued that unless the NSW government 'alters the matter by making certain appointments, we must play second fiddle, and Sydney must continue to be, according to British construction, a part of Victoria'.

If it happened to fall to my share to enter largely on comparative and comprehensive studies on the flora of all the Australian colonies, it must also be conceded; that for this purpose 13 years' previous special studies were made without any State aid, that early exploring journeys, beset with endless dangers, toils, and sacrifices, had to be performed for many years widely through Australia, and that the Government of Victoria is entitled to praise, free from any jealousy, for having largely afforded the means to establish a department in which the whole vegetation of Australia could be investigated connectedly, the due elaboration of the flora of any one of these colonies by itself being an absolute impossibility.

5

See M to T. Wilson, 3 April 1884.

In justice to myself it might also be admitted that such knowledge as I may possess was always cheerfully and unreservedly placed at the disposal of any inhabitants of these colonies for more than 30 years without substantial advantage whatever to myself beyond Victoria. Indeed I have looked upon my working always as universal Australian and not merely Victorian; and in doing so I carried out the wishes of most if not all the statesmen of this colony, that my department should endeavour to be useful also to the other colonies whenever occasions might arise, and should serve likewise with cosmopolitan views reciprocally the interests of any country beyond Australia. The eldest sister colony can, however, proudly claim that the zoology of all Australia has been far more extensively elaborated in her capital than anywhere else, not even excepting the great and ancient seat of British learning. Thus infinite praise is due to the several zealous, experienced, and gifted workers in your metropolis, who, in dealing with the respective branches of zoologic science, have earned the palm of the Australian fauna for New South Wales.