The correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller: 28/5/91. ¶ ¶ Regret the oversight, dear Prof Watson, in not sending you a complete impression of the "second Census of Austr. plants". ¶ This is now done by the mail. The printing fund was insuffici...

Document information

Physical location:

Gray Herbarium Archives, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 91.05.28

Plant names

Amaranthaceae
Search for Amaranthaceae in
Bladhia
Search for Bladhia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Bramia
Search for Bramia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Caryophylleae
Search for Caryophylleae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Gomphrena
Search for Gomphrena in
Hybanthus
Search for Hybanthus in
Malcolmia
Search for Malcolmia in
Polycarpaea
Search for Polycarpaea in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Temeda
Search for Temeda in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Wilkia
Search for Wilkia in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to Sereno Watson, 1891-05-28. 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/1890-6/1891/91-05-28-final.odt>, accessed June 4, 2026

28/5/91.

Regret the oversight, dear Prof Watson, in not sending you a complete impression of the "second Census of Austr. plants".

B89.12.03.

This is now done by the mail. The printing fund was insufficient, to furnish a preface and addenda; but a supplement is likely to appear at the end of this year.

No supplements to the Second census are known to have been published.

I do not altogether concur in your views of changes in systems and in names of plants.

M is presumably reacting to the arrangement used in Gray (1890), edited by Watson & Coulter; see pp. 3-18.

The subject is too large to discuss it in a letter. You may have read however my treatise thereon, written 2 or 3 years ago for the transact. of the R.S. of N.S.W.

B89.05.04.

also the preface to the first Census.

B83.03.04.

I may however give some few instances, to illustrate my own ideas.

Two European Professors sent me 2 species of as s, and yet the ar

are.

kept near one end of the system and the on the other. If RBr overlooked of Scopoli,

Scopoli (1777), p. 317, as Wilckia.

who quotes a specific name! when establishing , it was a want of care, particularly at that time, when bot. libraries were not large; if what is not likely

What is not likely interlined.

he willingly passed Scopoli's genus, it was a grave injustice.

is recorded in IPNI as being erected by W. T. Aiton (1810-13), vol. 4, p. 121; M lists Brown as the author in B69.07.04, p. 18. The genus is included in the part of the work in which TL2 attributes 'most of the new descriptions' to Brown; the formal authority for these species is given to Aiton as there is no explicit evidence in the protologues that Brown was the author. See Mabberly (1885), p. 186.

Genera with named species like , , ,

Themeda?

&c. were simply missed, and not intentionally passed. If such well established genera are left unattended to, where are the exceptions to commence and where to end? Fixity of dual names can only be attained by adopting in all cases the first binary name within a correct genus !

With regardful remembrance your

Ferd. von Mueller.

I hope the woodspecimens for the excellent Prof. Goodale adressed to you, have safely arrived.

Sentence is written in the central and left margins of the sheet comprising pages 2 and 3.