Ferdinand von Mueller

Dublin. Sunday.

1

The letter is undated. The reference to Bentham's letter in the final paragraph suggests a date of May 1861.

My dear Hooker

A few days a go I sent Sir Wm a dft for a letter to Mueller for his & your approval. When it comes back to me corrected I shall write it out & forward.

2

No letter from Harvey to M has been found.

I doubt however my power to move him from his purpose if his mind be bent on it. The best way would be to make him feel cut off from help or sympathy from Kew - & thrown altogether on his own Colonial resources, & his own collections. He may thereby be [drawn] back on Sonder perhaps - but he will find that a poor substitute for Kew. It is very unfortunate that he should be so intensely vain - & I know not how to deal with a thoroughly vain & self confident & at the same time energetic & capable man. I have done my best at a scold.

You asked me a few days ago whether Sonder or I had any of your Diosmeae. I have none - but probably Sonder had some from Black (who ought to know) and they may not be returned. They should have been returned if not, as they have been published over a twelvemonth.

3

Harvey & Sonder (1859-65), vol. 1.

But Herb. Hook. does not possess " Eck. & Zey " published collection,

4

Ecklon & Zeyher (1834-7); see also Nordenstam (1980).

of Diosmeae or anything else. And "Wallich's" with the numbers in Herb. Benth. are the same as "Zey" with numbers in Herb. Hooker. So probably after all, there is nothing missing. - If you be looking for Empleuridium you will probably look in vain. I doubt if it be anywhere except in Herb. Sonder & T.C.D.

5

Trinity College Dublin.

I shall forward the 5 copies of Bentham's letter

6

Presumably the printed version of G. Bentham to W. Hooker, 6 May 1861.

duly. I hope the appeal may succeed.