To George Bentham   17 April 1869

17/4/69

I have not very much to report, dear Mr Bentham, beyond the despatch of the last Dicotyledoneae in two large cases by the Anglesey. You need not be alarmed by the quantity of the material. The plants to a great extent are bulky, and I have spent much time to make the examinations & sorting so careful, as to encroach not severely on your own time. I hope the Rev. Mr Leighton & the Rev. Mr Berkeley will timely look over all the Fungi & Lichens at Kew, for the Australian Flora. Mr Mitten would probably help in the mosses. The more observers of special experience we can get to work on these plants, the more likley we will have excellent material for constructing the cryptogamic volume.¹

What a blessing we have such splendid elucidation of the Algae by Harvey already. It will be well for you to secure the subsidy for the 5th vol at once from the Colonial Agent, as it was saved out of my votes for 1868, and as it might be well to close the accounts thus far in our books here. The vote is not specially placed on the estimates, & thus I do the best I can to secure it always timely. Death might befal me, and then some difficulties would arise to obtain the subsidy in the manner, hitherto adopted, & special arrangements would require to be made.

Always your regardful

Ferd. von Mueller.²

Meissners Pimeleae³ have considerably decreased in number after my review of the species.⁴ In several instances I regard as varieties plants placed by the Basel Professor in different divisions of the genus. At the whole I think I have shed good deal of light on these plants, but the final elucidation must rest with you, as you have access to still more additional & particularly authentic specimens

The tendency of the leaves to turn inward or outward along the margin is as important for distinguishing the species of Pimelea as it is for those of Hibbertia & Pultenaea.

It seems to me, that Pimelea hispida, P. rosea, P. lanata, P. decussata are all varieties of one species (P. Brownii) They form all pretty plants distinct to the eye of a gardener, but are in reality I believe not species. If they differ specifically then the real characteristics escaped my view, nor are they ever pointed out by any writer. These plants certainly do not differ in the notes given by RBr & Meissner.⁵ Perhaps you have an opportunity to examine living plants at Kew.⁶

We have 2 (if not 3) species of Drymisperma.

The new species since 1856 do not make good the reductions. All Australia seems to possess about 60.⁷

Dicotyledoneae

Drymisperma

Hibbertia

Pimelea Brownii

Pimelea decussata

Pimelea hispida

Pimelea lanata

Pimelea rosea

Pultenaea