Melbourne, August 14, 1886.
Sir—All the species of pimelia1 contain an acrid principle, which in some is so strongly developed as to render the bark available as a vesicant. One of the species with the strongest burning acridity is Pimelia struta,2 which I noticed as long ago as 1848, on sandy ground, between Port Adelaide and your city. As pointed out in former writings of mine, the bark of several of our Australian species of pimelia can medicinally be substituted for that of the European daphnes;3 both genera belonging to one order of plants, that of Thymeleae. It is thus evident that the intermixture of pimelias of any kind into pastures is injurious to the herds or flocks, which in dearth of fodder, particularly during seasons of drought, might feed extensively on these acrid pimelias also. Where they prevail the ground should be ploughed up and sown with strong grasses and fodder-herbs, which would suffocate the pimelias, or prevent at all events them from spreading copiously.
Very respectfully yours
F. Von Mueller
J. G. O. Tepper, Esq, F.L.S.
Pimelia struta
Typesetter's error for Pimelea?
Typesetter's error for Pimelea stricta?
See, for example, B72.07.01, B80.13.07 and subsequent editions under Thymelaea tinctoria; B69.02.03.
Letter not found; the text given here is from 'A noxious plant', South Australian advertiser, 20 August 1886, p. 7 (B86.08.09), a 'Letter to the Editor' from Tepper and two letters that he enclosed with this, M's letter to him and, printed before this, a letter dated 19 August from an unnamed correspondent in Yorketown, SA, enclosing a specimen of a plant with suspected toxic properties.
Please cite as “FVM-86-08-14,” 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