From Clement Hodgkinson   12 September 1864

Office of Lands & Survey

Melbourne, 12th Sept. 1864.

Sir,

I was much disappointed when informed by the Crown Lands Bailiff of the names of the plants obtainable by him from the Botanical Gardens on the 7th instant, as I left you with the impression that you would give to the Board of Land and Works some pines and a few Pittosporum Eugenoides instead of which Mr Bickford brought away a few plants comparatively useless for the purpose for which they were required, with the exception of two specimens of large flowering Pittosporum. Being informed by Mr Bickford that you have about one hundred (100) plants of this variety of Pittosporum, I shall esteem it a favor if you will spare two (2) dozen of them for the reserves vested in the Board of Land & Works.

I take this opportunity of bringing under your notice the necessity of making some more satisfactory arrangements for the future supply to the Board of Land and Works, from the public propagating houses and beds — of non-indigenous trees required for completing the planting of the extensive reserves vested in that body, the more especially as it is probable that the Board may undertake the establishment of forests of non-indigenous trees in some of the untimbered districts of Victoria.

Without intending to comment unfavorably upon the system under which plants are propagated at the Botanic Gardens for distribution, — which, I am fully aware, forms only an inferior portion of the important duties devolving upon you, — and without intending to convey any imputation of disregard by you of requisitions for supply of plants from the Botanical Gardens for the reserves vested in the Board of Land and Works, I must remark that the supply from that source has hitherto been so uncertain and precarious as to compel the Board to spend large sums of money in the purchase of plants from nurserymen in Melbourne and Sydney, and this proceeding has excited much comment by the successive ministerial Heads of the Crown Lands Department.

In my humble opinion it is incumbent either that the required number and description of plants wanted by the Board of Land and Works should be propagated at the Botanical Gardens and supplied from thence, or that an experienced horticulturist — furnished with adequate appliances for the propagation of plants, should be employed under the direct control of the Board of Land & Works.

As the latter alternative would not be likely to receive the assent of the legislature unless the expenses which it would involve be counter balanced by a corresponding reduction in the sum annually placed at your disposal for the propagation of plants, I think it would be preferable that your Department should undertake the supply.

The trees deemed most eligible for the reserves vested in the Board of Land & Works in and near Melbourne are the quick growing pines and cypresses of Oregon and California, the Australian species of Araucaria, and Western Australian Gums.

During 1865 the Reserves in question could advantageously receive five hundred plants of these kinds, in addition to five hundred (500) ordinary pines (pinaster, halepensis, sylvestris, &c).

May I request you will be good enough to state your views relative to this communication in order that they may be considered at the next meeting of the Board of Land and Works.

I have the honor to be,

Sir,

Your most obedt Servant,

[Clement Hodgkinson]1

Assistt Commr of Lands & Survey.

 

The Government Botanist,

&c, &c, &c,2

editorial addition.
On 17 September 1864 M's reply to this letter (not found) was forwarded by the Crown Lands and Survey office to the Chief Secretary's office. The reply was returned to M on 6 October minuted 'to meet the requirements of the Lands Dept'. M returned the reply on 8 October and it was forwarded to the Lands and Survey Office on 10 October minuted: 'Applicn shd come thro this office' (No. 10224, vol. 1864 K, VPRS 1168/P, PROV). M also wrote separately to the Minister, R. Heales on 14 September 1864 (letter not found) its receipt being recorded in the Department's inward correspondence register (No. 8469, unit 9, VPRS 227/P1, PROV).

Please cite as “FVM-64-09-12,” in Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, edited by R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora, J.H. Voigt and Monika Wells accessed on 28 March 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/vonmueller/letters/64-09-12