From George Perrin1    30 November 1892

Office of Mines,

Melbourne, Nov 30th 189 2

My Dear Baron

In re. the approaching Science Assocn meeting at Adelaide — You are aware that my paper on "The new Tasmanian Eucalypt" was incomplete by reason of the difficulty in determining its species. You have now decided that question in my favor by giving it my name for which honor I thank you most heartily.2 My object in writing is to ask that some notice should be inserted in the proceedings which will complete the matter by bringing the new Eucalypt before the Scientific World in the pages of the proceedings3 Perhaps advantage might be taken to settle the question of nomenclature of Moore's Eucalypt discovered at the Back of the Huon4 on Mt Wellington in 1886 which he wished to name after you and which now clashes with the one (E. Muelleriana) of C. Hodgkinson.5 If you would like me to do it, I would write up a short paper dealing with these Eucalypts from a general point of view and you could then add notes to same re Botanical structure &c. I merely throw out these suggestions for you approval, or if you think it better I could confine myself to the two Tasmanian Eucalypts and Mr C. Hodgkinson or Mr Howitt6 could deal with the other. Moore's tree is as yet without an official name — but he wished it to be called after you 7

Yours very faithfully

Geo. S. Perrin

 

Baron Sir Ferdinand von Mueller K.C.M.G. &c. &c.

Botanic Domain

St Kilda Rd.

 

Eucalyptus Muelleriana

 
 
1
MS found with a specimen of Eucalyptus perriniana (MEL 1611957).
2
At the Melbourne meeting of the Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science in January 1890, Perrin had exhibited a specimen of a Tasmanian eucalypt that he suspected was a new species; see Report of the meeting, p. 557. Rodway (1894), p. 181, in his description attributed the name to M, who had, he wrote, described it 'at the meeting of the Association of the Advancement of Science in Melbourne, from specimens procured from immature trees not yet in flower'.
3
Perrin had made the same suggestion previously; see G. Perrin to M, 25 August 1892 (in this edition as 92-08-25a) and 10 September 1892. M did not take it up.
4
Huon River, Tas.
5
Hodgkinson had published this name while drawing attention to the potential usefulness of the timber of the tree (see Report of the Melbourne Harbour Trust Commissioners [1890], pp. 18-20. Perrin seems unaware that the species had subsequently been formally described by A. W. Howitt as Eucalyptus muelleriana; see Howitt (1891).
6
Alfred Howitt.
7
T. B. Moore had in fact formally described Eucalyptus muelleri; see Moore (1886).

Please cite as “FVM-92-11-30,” 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 27 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/vonmueller/letters/92-11-30