To George Bentham   26 November 1862

Melbourne bot Garden

26/11/62

Dear Mr Bentham.

Since I wrote last to you I have arranged a good deal of Leguminosae. Of Acaciae I have alone nearly 40 fascicles; altho' they comprise very few really new species, the collection proves interesting as showing the range & variation of each.¹

In working up F. Gregorys plants from N W. Australia for the Edinb. bot[.] Society, to whom I have sent the record by this mail,² I came across a beautiful species of Monenteles, which fully corresponds to the description given by D.C. of M. sphaeranthoides, collected by A.C.³ on the N W. coast, except that I find the pappus just like in the other sp. of Monenteles. you could confer a favor on me, by sending me a flowerhead & leaf of Cunninghams plant, so that I may either correct my or D.C.'s error

I believe that I forgot mentioning to you, that I described my formerly named Pleiodontium as Homalium brachybotrys in the transactions of the Vict Institute.⁴

I received Pavonia hastata lately from theBalloneRiver, a new habitat[.]⁵ I have sent this week a collector⁶ to the N. East coast, who will bring, I am convinced, many novelties for the Australian flora out of the mountain jungles. I enclose the fruit of a new Astragaloid genus from the N. W. coast. I have the plant in cultivation, but it has not yet flowered. I have now also ascertained, that the "Bitter-bark" used as a tan[n] by the Queensland Colonists originates from an oleaceous plant, which proves a new species of that section of Chionanthus formerly separated as Linociera. Blume was right in combining the genera. R. Br. overlooked the note of absense of albumen. I call my plant Chionanthus picrophloia.⁷ The bitter principle would thus be Lilocin or Philly[c]in.

Probably I overlooked in my former note to give his Excellency Sir Will. Denison credit for having placed at my disposal Leichhardts plants. They were on his Excellencys own proposition sent to me on loan by the Trustees of the Sydney Museum.⁸ Reviewing the Adrianae, I find that not more than 2 sp. can be distinguished.

I fear you will detect occasional errors (not notified) in comparing some of my manuscript notes with some of the N. W. Australian plants. When through the neglect of the Officer, who had charge of the collection on board of the "Tom Tough" one large cask with specimens was perfectly saturated with water, I could only recover few of the specimens & had to relabel them from memory.⁹ Thus I fear occasional confusion originated.

I certainly think Busbeckea must be distinguished from Capparis. The calyx is very remarkable. It has no sutures, much less sepals, is absolutley monophyllous & calyptriform & breaks with irregular ruptures whenever the flower expands. This character is of too great a morphologic importance as to be discarded. I have however not seen the true Busbeckea of Norfolk Island & that plant may possibly be a true Capparis.

Trusting that you are in uninterrupted enjoyment of health,

I remain, dear Sir,

Your very regardful & obedient

Ferd Mueller

In one of my last letters I had the pleasure of recommending Mr C. Moore of Sydney for the Fellowship of the Linnean Society¹⁰

Acacia

Adrianae

Busbeckea

Capparis

Chionanthus

Chionanthus picrophloia

Homalium brachybotrys

Leguminosae

Linociera

Monenteles sphaeranthoides

Pavonia hastata

Pleiodontium