To George Bentham   21 April 1865

21/4/65.

I presume, dear Mr Bentham, that one of my letters to you must have strayed; for I am under the impression, that I suggested Mr Will. Woolls’s election into the Linnean Society.¹ He is a Gentleman of deep classical knowledge and his information on the plants of New South Wales as well as his contribution to our knowledge of the vegetation of that part of Australia entitle him well to a seat amidst the Linneans.² If I can I will arrange about the transmission of £100 for the third volume by next mail.³ Prof Balfour sends me a paper by this mail, bearing his handwriting, while the telegram announces the death of a Prof Balfour.⁴ I sincerely pray, that so admirable a man may not have been withdrawn from bot. science by an early death. — Surely I could not have said anything severe against the second volume of your work.⁵ In the absense of opportunity to see the Australian plants in the wilderness it would be impossible for you to be impressed with the same ideas as those of a botanical traveller in Australia. In most works hitherto issued on any vegetation the limits of species are ill laid down, and it is only in certain instances, such as the treatment of certain species of ferns defined by our venerable friend Sir Will. Hooker that we find an approach to philosophical truth in this direction. Almost all even European descriptive works on plants stand far below yours on the Australian flora, because the authors cannot emancipate themselfes to the freedom of commencing the⁶ novo on a new basis of limits of species. Homo sapiens might be the type what a species should be! There are no transitions to monkeykind & so forth & never will be and the same rule holds true throughout the creation; it is even not impaired (in my opinion) by the pleiomorphism of the lowest & minutest algae & animal, which in their turn are merely gifted by nature to assume more varied processes of evolution, but not endowed to proceed there[in] indefinitely to any direction or to any extent. It gladdens my heart to see that you recognized the true specific precints of Calycothrix tetragona.⁷ I am aware, that the definition of the Baeckeae & Chamaelaucieae would try your patience & it is good that this difficult piece of phytography has fallen to your share. Eucalypti you will find as difficult, though they are so easily dissected, and it will be important for you to adopt a distribution of the species that will serve the investigator as well in the field as in the study room.

But to do these important trees justice, as they will form the most valuable practical chapter in the work, it is necessary to devote at least one page-print to each species & its forms, due attention being required to notes on bark, wood, colonial appellations geographic & geological distribution, for which purpose the fine wood-collections transferred from the exhibition to Kew will be of considerable value.⁸

My Euphorbiaceae went to Dr Baillon after I had supplied of all species of interest specimens to D.C.⁹ and to Mueller¹⁰ and after both declined to make arrangements for safely getting from some coast-point in Europe this unique collection transferred on loan to Geneve. Could I have known the precise time, when my namesake would be at Kew or Paris, of course I could have sent the plants there. But nevertheless Muellers notes¹¹ will be printed before Baillon can do anything & this is mutually understood. I act in such cases always fairly. I do for instance not like to get forestalled in describing plants of Rockingham Bay;¹² I disdained describing Dr Haasts New Zealand plants of which I had very many sent to me before he opened on my request a correspondence with Dr Hooker, in order that his countryman should describe them. What ever may be my errors, I feel that no-one can ever charge me in having acted unequitably. There must yet vast additions to be Euphorbiaceae discovered in all tropical countries, the plants of this order being often too insignificant to attract general attention of collectors.

I will send the first installment of Compositae in June, though I foresee that you cannot possibly have space for any portion of them in the 3 vol. & to disrupt them in two volumes would be unadvisable. Indeed they will fill nearly a volume by themselfes. Loranthaceae are truely petaliferous, there being a very distinct calyx & corolla in Loranthus. That all Monochlamydeae should be interspersed to other divisions of the veget. empire is patent & then Santalaceae would take their postion next to Loranthaceae.

With best regards

yours

Ferd Mueller

A few additional myrtaceae, rubiaceae &c were sent to Sir William by this mail.

I have received from Miss Atkinson ripe fruits of Nuytsia ligustrina, which prove it a distinct genus to which I give the name Atkinsonia.¹³ The pericarp is not winged; but the albumen is deeply 8-furrowed so that the transverse section expresses a star; the embryo is central. Perhaps I shall be obliged to leave the definition of the genus to you, as my Loranthaceae are in Europe.

Atkinsonia

Baeckeae

Chamaelaucieae

Compositae

Eucalyptus

Euphorbiaceae

Loranthaceae

Loranthus

Monochlamydeae

Myrtaceae

Nuytsia ligustrina

Rubiaceae

Santalaceae