To George Bentham   20 June 1872

Melbourne bot Garden

20/6/72

 

It is pleasing, dear Mr Bentham, to see you advance so well with the Euphorbiaceae.1 It will be a very complete vol that 6th,2 more so than the first 2 or 3, as within the last few years so much was got from N.E. Australia. Indeed I do not think, that many additional species are left to be discovered in Australia.

I shall send off soon the Orchideae, which alone will fill a large box. That will be sufficient for finishing the volume, so at least I anticipate. To me it appears a pity that the flora foreruns the genera.3 The latter work is important for the whole world , the former chiefly for Australia, — and so little local interest is evinced in native plants here, that I do not think more than a dozen copies of the work, valuable as it is, were sold in Australia. Poor Harvey's phycology4 fared worse. — I mention this only to show, that there is no reason to overhurry the work. R Brown and Roeper & others have assuredly explained beyond doubt, that the apparently simple flower of Euphorbia is in reality a compound one.5 Do you really think that the old order of Urticeae ought to be broke up? If we take it analogous to Euphorbiaceae, then Moreae, Artocarpeae &c become sections only.

Sponia aspera is to goats and other pasture animals a deadly poison. This seems not known and might be mentioned in the volume.6

I fully agree in your views about the floral and carpic structures of Compositae, and thus the term achenium must be reserved for the fruit of that order and those closely allied.7 Dr Steetz, I think, has claims on recognition as working on Compositae. He also regarded, so he said in one of his last letters to me, the researches of Cassini far more important than those of Lessing.8

Ever your regardful

Ferd von Mueller

 

I have asked Grisebach to tell me what his Ophelia Baxteri is from K.G. Sound9

It seems Dr Sonder never received the 5th vol of the Flora.10

 
 

Artocarpeae

Compositae

Euphorbia

Euphorbiaceae

Monopetaleae

Moreae

Ophelia Baxteri

Orchideae

Sponia aspera

Urticeae

1
See G Bentham to M, 10 March 1872.
2
i.e. Bentham (1863-78), vol. 6.
3
Bentham & Hooker (1862-83).
4
Harvey (1858–63).
5
Cf. Bentham’s remarks in G. Bentham to M, 17 April 1872.
6
No such remark was made in Bentham (1863-78), vol. 6, p. 158.
7
Anonymous (1872) reports Bentham’s views on the origins of the flower and fruit structures of the Compositae; the complete paper was published as Bentham (1873a).
8
Letter not found, but see J. Steetz to M, 27 July 1860.
9
WA. M’s letter not found.
10
Postscripts written in margins of letter.

Please cite as “FVM-72-06-20a,” 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 27 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/vonmueller/letters/72-06-20a