To George Bentham   5 November 1873

Melbourne

5/11/73

I was gratified at the receipt of the proof pages, dear Mr Bentham, concerning the rest of the Orchideae and Irideae,¹ and I trust that your strength & spirit will remain unimpaired. The Orchideae have arrived, but I am not yet aware by what Ship the Irideae & Haemodoraceae are gone. So far as the helplessness in my Department admits of my doing so, I work to get the rest of the Monocotyledoneae in order, the object involving much mechanic sorting, on which I must now spend my own valuable time, as I have no Departmental & private means for such mechanical aid now, only one single assistant being allowed for the whole Department.

It is impossible to work a large Department mainly out of a Director's Salary. The £100 for the next volume are however specially voted last week² and I will take measures to request the transmission of the sum to Mr Michie, the new Agent General as early as I can.³

I hope, venerable friend, that you will take care of your strength. I am quite glad to learn, that you will vacate the Presidential Chair of the L.S., though no one filled it with more dignity and zeal than yourself. Indeed I was sorry almost to see your time so largely absorbed and for so many years too by the Society. If you intend to attain Lady Smith's age,⁴ you must largely reduce your work hours.

Possibly my remark on the priority of Phyllachne over Forstera has been misunderstood.⁵ The Forsters themselves would have far preferred to see their Phyllachne acknowledged, than the genus named after them.

When I have restored an older name, I was simply impelled by a strong feeling of equity. See, dear Mr Bentham, both Forsters with all their toil, have not above a few hundred plants named themselves. Poor Loureiro, after the enormous sacrifices of 30 years in unaided studies in Cochin china will also leave his authority for not even one hundred plants, and these, I think, we should endeavour to keep for his good. It is true Floscopa is a barbarism and ought to be written Floriscopa. — Centipeda supresses the so long familiar name Myriogyne, Trema the long used name Sponia; Centipeda moreover reminds of a zoologic name. Rottlera was still more universally known, and some 30 species are now overthrown simply to bring — quite rightly — one Mallotus of Loureiro to honor again.⁶

Didiscus was a gender name known everywhere since 30 years and is now rightly gone.⁷ Forsters priority in the "characteres"⁸ seems simply overlooked! Most people imagine Linnés, the son's, suppl.⁹ anterior to the "characteres", but it is only anterior to the "prodromus" of G Forster.¹⁰ Seemann in restoring Forsters authority for Barringtonia correctly in quoting the "characteres" overlooked the right specific name "speciosa".¹¹

I should be glad to give LaBillardiere full credit for his few hundred plants also after his 30 years studies, though Genosiris is not well construed.¹² Against Iriogenos could have been no objections. Calythrix is as bad a composition.¹³ But even Linnés “rannunculoides” & similar words are allowed to pass, though one might be prompted even now to write rannunculaceas &c

In restoring Candollea, I do not wish Botanic friends to adopt that genus for Stylideae; it was merely a suggestion, arising from local researches on Dilleniaceae. Much less did I claim the authorship for all the Candolleas thus created.¹⁴ Your plant is an excellent one. Let every author have credit for his species, and in transpositions, such as they might have effected themselves, let us say with you (... sub Stylidio). Unless we bring the good old names back to their righteous position, others are sure to do it after us. See, dear Mr Bentham, very few at any age (and none will hereafter) have really stamped their names universally on the vegetation of the globe. Not Loureiro, not Forster, not Labillardière; all where but local workers in a limited area, out of which these good and labourious workers remain for ever unknown. How many are there in the proud position to have extensively identified themselves for all times through the names of plants with every part of the globe. How many share that honor with you? a honor so labouriously earned by you to perhaps even a higher extent than even the few of your compeers? Linné, both D.C., both Hookers, Willdenow, Berkeley, Hampe, Mitten Agardh, Acharius, Nees, Meissner, Lindley, Kunth. Perhaps no others and there is no room now left for others! Great as Martius, Roxburgh, Wallich, Wight, Miquel, Blume and perhaps a few others are among phytographers, they are only known in one single part of the Globe mainly or solely.

How many are there besides Linné, who could say, that all over the globe nearly every square mile of land bore plants established scientifically by them. That is a glorious enveyable position.

Ever your

Ferd. von Mueller

Barringtonia speciosa

Calythrix

Candollea

Centipeda

Didiscus

Dilleniaceae

Floscopa

Forstera

Genosiris

Haemodoraceae

Irideae

Mallotus

Monocotyledoneae

Myriogyne

Orchideae

Phyllachne

Rottlera

Sponia

Stylideae

Trema