From George Bentham   17 November 1867

25, WILTON PLACE, S.W.

Nov 17/67¹

My dear Sir

I was much pleased to learn by your last letter that you found yourself much better for your visit to Queens Cliff Mr Wilson² whom I met the other day at a dinner party tells me that he also has heard better accounts of you — I trust that you have now quite recovered your usual health and that you will not overwork yourself.

The whole of the plants you announce as having sent off have arrived safely, those per Great Britain first and per Sussex a few days after. I hope that the remainder of Monopetalae may be on their way ere this reaches you

In one of your letters you speak of several of Drummonds nos not being quoted by me,³ the reason is that these numbers are very irregularly preserved in the Hookerian herbarium which has the most complete set. The first collection was distributed in the first instance as sent over here without numbers, of this I see numerous specimens from the Hookerian, my own, Lindley's and other herbaria, corresponding specimens were afterwards sent with numbers which were not regularly entered in the herbaria which had them without numbers — then came successively the 2d 3d 4th 5th and 6th collections and various supplements all separately numbered and often in Sir William's⁴ set not numbered so that there is always the greatest uncertainty about the numbering and I once thought of not giving the numbers at all for fear of leading into error — sometimes also the numbers badly written have been misread and erroneously copied.

I am very steadily at work at the Flora.⁵ Since I wrote I have finished Campanulaceae (Lobelia 18 sp. Pratia 6 sp. Isotoma 6 sp. Wahlenbergia 2 sp.) Scaevola, 48 sp. and some small genera and nearly finished Goodenia. De Vriese's monograph is I agree with you the worst I ever met with and if I had not before me authentic specimens of the majority of his species I never could have made them out. In Hooker's collection which he had to work open he has given one name to five species belonging to three natural Orders. His generic characters sometimes belong to only a small portion of the species he puts under them. He quotes the same specimen for two different species — Describes one plant and figures another etc etc.⁶

There are only two or three of Brown's which appear not to be in your collection Goodenia pumilio a curious little plant which we have also from Cunningham and I do not think you have G. coronopifolia G. glabra Br. is G. flagellifera De Vr.⁷ G. viscidula⁸ Br is your G. spicata (at least for the look, I have not yet examined it)

I am afraid I shall have to make a genus⁹ for your Scaevola goodeniacea, the ovary is so very exceptional there are 1 or 2 ovules in each cell pendulous from the apex of the cavity, whilst in all Goodeniaceae I have as yet gone through they are erect I do not like monotypic genera and so I wait to decide till I have gone through all the little genera — If I find it really so exceptional I shall have it figured for Hooker's Icones which is now going on — the first part of the new Series is just out.

I am very glad to hear you have a collector in Arnhem's Land.¹⁰ We want much good specimens of tropical and Central Australian plants to test the value of numerous species necessarily founded on single fragments.

Ever yours sincerely

George Bentham

Campanulaceae

Goodenia coronopifolia

Goodenia flagellifera

Goodenia glabra

Goodenia pumilio

Goodenia spicata

Goodenia viscidula

Goodeniaceae

Isotoma

Lobelia

Monopetalae

Pratia

Scaevola

Scaevola goodeniacea

Wahlenbergia