York Nursery Kew1
Augt 1st /84
Dear Baron
You will of course have got my letter with the description of the Phaijus,2 about as near natural.3 You mention the Rhizome the size I cannot exactly give but it near enough when I say that is like common ginger only not so knotty it has no distinct bulb at all so far however as my plants are concerned perhaps if I say it is like a Bamboo root I shall be nearest what it is, but smaller in proportion to the two plants.
As regards the naming of this plant after me I think it is a right I can claim in this respect.4 Mr Layard did not know anything about it nor did he make any special mention beyond the fact of his picking it up while looking for ferns for me &c & in fact he had forgotten it altogether even when I mentioned it as having flowered he did not know wether5 it was an Orchid or not at the time. I should like though that the next that turns up new should be called after him I have yet 3 or 4 Orchids from N C6 yet to bloom
hoping you are daily improving
I beg to express a hope that you will soon get better from your long illness
Regardfully yours
James Roberts
Phaijus
Melbourne.
Phaius? Frequently written as Phajus by M.
See J. Roberts to M, 30 July 1884.
M described Phajus robertsii in B83.12.05.
whether?
New Caledonia.
File annotated by T. B. Muir on 24 March 1977: 'James Roberts received specimens from Consul Layard, New Caledonia, (& perhaps from others) in ±1883. He cultivated these, and one of them was described by Mueller (Phajus robertsii) in S. Sci. Rec. 3: 265 (Dec. 1883)' i.e. B3.12.05.
Please cite as “FVM-84-08-01,” 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