To William Thiselton-Dyer   18 February 1890

18/2/90¹

A few hurried lines only, dear Mr Dyer, to say:

1, that the Livistona of Gipps-Land is undoubtedly L. australis. The shape of the leaves alters somewhat in age; thus you will likely find, that the two plants, to which you refer as cultivated, are not of equal height and therefore not of equal age. The two other spec., mentioned by RBr., are probably both forms of one and must be intratropic solely.

2, the Schoenus curvulus, referred by Mr Clarke,² to S. indutus, is not likely identical with it, as they belong to two phytogeographically very distinct regions. S. indutus is exclusively W. Australian, where also the endemismus³ of the Cyperoideae is so extensively developed. In the essay on Sir W. Macgregor's plants,⁴ p 36, I compared it to S laxus, which likewise belongs to a rather frigid mountain region, while S. indutus is a species of warm and even hot lowlands.

3, that you have not received specimens of all the kinds of plants, gathered on the highlands of New Guinea, (very few being brought from the lowlands, except ferns and some from the Louisiades⁵), is explained by the paucity and fragmentary state of them, particularly also the Rhododendrons. I thought it therefore best, to keep the scanty material together with a view of lithographic delineations being prepared; but that can only be done, after the Atlas of the Salsolaceae⁶ shall have been completed, that work being urgently wanted for rural purposes.

Regardfully your

always

Ferd von Mueller

4. If you have not Livistona Mariae⁷ living plants can be sent from here.

Just real traces of Leichhardt discovered after 42 years!⁸ Our geogr. branch here is sending out at once a party, to bring in yet available relics, and to learn more of the terrible catastrophe from the natives, the members of the expedition having died successively from thirst!

Cyperoideae

Livistona Mariae

Rhododendron

Salsolaceae

Schoenus curvulus

Schoenus indutus

Schoenus laxus