From Frederick Bailey1    7 June 1886

June 7th2

Dear Baron

The enclosed Eucalypt I found in forests at Nerang Ck.3 but neglected to obtain a log for the wood exhibit. The tree is tall and erect, with a stringy bark. I take it for the normal form of Eucalyptus piperita, Sm judging from Flora Australiensis.4 I could get no flowers at the time, but send you leaf & fruit specimens. It differs greatly from what I understand as E. eugenioides Sieb. & E. acmenioides Schau. Kindly let me have your opinion

Will you let me know if I am correct in referring the from E. Palmer — to your T. lactiflua? I have a specimen of T.5 from Dr Schomburgk marke[d] as from the north but in my opinion it is only T. conferta and in no way agreeing with your description of T. lactiflua as given in the Flora but you know we cannot put confidence in Dr S's determinations.

Re the seeds the persons here have to collect after receiving an order so some delay is always the result

Your very truly

F. M. Bailey

 

Eucalyptus acmenioides

Eucalyptus eugenioides

Eucalyptus piperita

Tristania conferta

Tristania lactiflua

Tristania latiflua

1
MS annotation by M: 'E. eugenoides'.
2
Dated to 1886 on the basis of Bailey’s reference to his wood exhibit, since he is known to have been assembling a collection of wood specimens at that time for display at the Colonial and Indian Exhibition in London; cf. F. Bailey to M, 19 April 1886, and Bailey (1886a).
3
Qld.
4
i.e. Bentham (1863-78), vol. 3, p. 207.
5
sic.

Please cite as “FVM-86-06-07,” 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 19 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/vonmueller/letters/86-06-07