To William Thiselton-Dyer1    2 July 1891

2/7/91.2

 

Thanks for your considerate proposal, my honored friend, that a principal set of Dr Henry’s west-chinese collections should be secured for £22.10/- by my Department.3 I at once recommended this to the Minister of my Department, who at once approved of it, so that the sum will be sent, so soon as the collection reaches here.4 Let me thank you for your thoughtfulness of my establishment.

I had some idea, that you would have caused the Faradaya splendida to be illustrated in the Bot. Mag., as it is such a handsome and rare plant, and as it ought to be regarded as the typic species of the genus.5

I find, that I erred in restoring Diplanthera of du Petit Thouars.6 When turning to Steinheil’s article in the Annales des sciences naturelles,7 I missed the “ at the end of the quotation and thought the specific name of Steinheil belonged also to Thuars8 in support of the genus. I never saw Thuars work, and Mr Jackson does not say, that he only published genera.9 So did Scopoli, but he did give stability to his genera in the binominal system by quotations.10

Always regardfully

your

Ferd von Mueller

 

Will you kindly impress on Dr Cooke, that in the vol. on Australian mycology, for which 4 colonies have voted each £100 - - , and which issue received my full support here, my Department is not treated unjustly. Not only was I the first, who extensively collected fungs in Continental Australia, but I had from amateur and also many paid collectors very numerous species first from Queensland who never would have collected fungs otherwise,11 which amassing of material went on for 30 years; yet in the Grevillea12 very little acknowledgement is recently given either to my Department nor myself, while some amateurs, who communicate directly with Dr Cooke, get infinite praise, so that it looks as if I had neglected altogether this branch of knowledge.13 You have even lots of fungs from me in the Kew Herbarium.

 

Diplanthera

Faradaya splendida

Correspondent inferred from context and Thiselton-Dyer’s annotation.
Stamped Royal Gardens Kew 6. Jul. 91. and annotated by Thiselton-Dyer in lead pencil on front of f. 5And 8.7.91 (letter not found).
See W. Thiselton-Dyer to M, 10 April 1891. The MS is annotated by W. Hemsley in the margin next to this sentence: Placed in the bin WBH [i.e. made ready for posting].
See M to A. McLean, 27 May 1891. The collection in question is now in MEL.

This paragraph is marked with a line in the margin and Faradaya is underlined. Annotation by W. Hemsley: 't. 7187 August'.

See Hooker (1865-1904), vol. 117. The specimen illustrated ‘was sent to the Royal Gardens, Kew from those of Brisbane in 1879’.

M had accepted Du Petit-Thouars’ genus Diplanthera in his Census (B89.13.12), p. 204, and treated Robert Brown’s Diplanthera as a synonym of Deplanchea(B89.13.12, p. 167).
Steinheil (1838). Diplantherais discussed on pp. 97-9 where Steinheil described D. tridentata. See also M to A. Engler, 6 August 1892 for a discussion of nomenclatural rules about the recognition of genera erected without an accompanying species description. In B74.08.01, p. 218, M mentioned Halodule,a genus which in B89.13.11, p. 204, he synonomized with Thouars’ Diplanthera.
i.e. Thouars.
Jackson (1881), in which Du Petit-Thouars is mentioned on pp. 350, 352.
Scopoli (1777).
who never would have collected fungs otherwise interlined in the MS, with its intended position in the text indicated by a connecting line.
Cooke edited Grevillea, a quarterly record of cryptogramic botany and its literature.
‘that energetic lady … Mrs W. Martin, (neé Flora Campbell)’ (Cooke, (1890). p. 83) was listed frequently in Grevillea. M was not completely ignored, being listed, for example, as communicating a number of specimens in vol. 19, 1890-9. However, these were not indicated by an asterisk as they had been in some earlier volumes.

Please cite as “FVM-91-07-02a,” in Ɛpsilon: The Ferdinand von Mueller Collection accessed on 27 October 2021, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/vonmueller/letters/91-07-02a