Document information
Physical location:
90.06.24Preferred Citation:
Ferdinand von Mueller to Clement Hodgkinson, 1890-06-24. 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/1890-6/1890/90-06-24-final.odt>, accessed June 13, 2026
1
Letter not found. The text given here is from Clement Hodgkinson's report in Report of the Melbourne Harbour Trust Commissioners for the year 1890, p. 19 (B91.13.09). It was also published n 'Yellow string bark', Leader, 19 July 1890, p. 14 (B90.07.03). Hodgkinson's report was presented to the meeting
of the Commissioners held on 9 July 1890 (Age, 10 July 1890, p. 7). Hodgkinson introduced M's letter by:
It is astonishing that this kind of eucalyptus has been so long unknown to Melbourne
timber merchants and to botanists. Having corresponded with Baron von Mueller relative
thereto, I received from him the following interesting letter, dated 24th ult:'.
Sir— In reply to your kind letter dear Mr. Hodgkinson,
let me say that I have now sufficient information about the Yellow Stringy Bark tree
to regard it as a distinct kind of tree.
I will let you know under what name it will be recorded in a few days.
As it is only known from three localities,
in none of which I have ever made a stay, I had formerly not so clear ideas about
the distinctness of this Eucalyptus as now.
Have you any opportunity of getting any seeds of it secured, it being so valuable
for timber purposes? I should be thankful of receiving your information on the specific
strength and weight of this timber.
2
Letter not found.
3
Eucalyptus muelleriana was described and named in A. Howitt (1891), pp. 89-91, read at a meeting of the
Royal Society of Victoria on 10 July 1890. Howitt (p. 91) states that he had compared
specimens with those held by M and, 'fortified by the opinion of our greatest authority',
was satisfied that it was distinct.
4
As Howitt had discussed the species with M it is likely that when he wrote to Hodgkinson
M knew of the outlines of Howitt's description; he either did not know what name Howitt
was using or, perhaps more likely, deferred reporting the name until the paper had
been read, thus preserving Howitt's priority for the necessary 'few days'.
5
M presumably obtained this information from Howitt, who specified the three localities
in A. Howitt (1891).
6
The report in the Leader included a table of results of tests of five samples of the timber, but Hodgkinson
later sent a letter to the Editor correcting a typographical error in the description
of the tests performed (Leader, 26 July 1890, p. 12).
Regardfully yours,
(Signed) Ferdinand von Mueller.