2 Davey st Hobart.
14 July 1884
My dear Baron
I send you enclosed two species of Ferns for your examination both of which appear
to me to be new to Tasmania. One, the smaller, closely agrees with the description
given of
Hymenophyllum
marginatum
. Hook et Grev. Port Jackson, N.S.W. The other is so densely matted with scales that
I am not sure of its alliance. They both exist in abundance in the Western region
of Tasmania where the rocks are of Silurian age. Locality Honeysuckle Hill. Queeres'
River,
in the vicinity of the Huxley, Tyndall and Owen range of mountains. The Collector,
Mr Moore,
is one of our intelligent Surveyors who is engaged at present in opening up this
little known district, and possibly other novelties may soon be placed in your hands.
Should one of the ferns be new to science perhaps you will kindly encourage Mr Moore
by associating his name with the discovery. You will recollect that our last addition
to the ferns of Tasmania was obtained from this same region.
With regard to Baron von Ettingshausen's paper
on the Tertiary Flora of Tasmania I am pleased to find that the Author has very kindly
forwarded a copy to me gratuitously and unsolicited This together with your paper
to the Royal Soc of Tas,
will be of great advantage to me.
You will observe from a paper (advance copy enclosed) that I have discovered and described
a new species of
from our coal measures.
It is the only complete
Strobilus
or cone
of this fossil genus, so far as I know discovered in the coal measures of Australia
— certainly the only one from Tasmania. I have taken the liberty of naming [it]
after yourself
When the drawing is finished in lithograph I will forward a copy.
Bye the bye, who is Mr Rasmussen who is now in Launceston?
He has recently come from Queensland and has got himself into bad odour in Launceston
by lecturing once or twice on very elementary subjects the greater part of one of
them having been plagiarised from various well known authors
Recently he has betrayed much ignorance upon botanical matters, abuses the systematic
binominal nomenclature of botanists & otherwise, making a parade of the possession
of elementary knowledge in botany.
You will observe I have taken notice of some of his observations in one of the scraps
send to you herewith.
I cannot conceive how anyone who knows the necessity and the value of the existing
bi-nominal system of nomenclature could possibly write in the way which Mr Rasmussen
does. It is evident to me that he must possess very little knowledge of scientific
method. Has he in any material way contributed to the knowledge of Australian Botany
as far as you know?
With great regard
believe me
Yours sincerely
Robt M Johnston
Baron Ferd. von Mueller, K.C.M.G: M.D: F.R.S. etc etc,
Government Botanist
Melbourne