16/2/93
Am not much surprised, dear Mr Rodway, that the blue-fruited Coprosma proved distinct from the genuine species, of which I had no good specimens to compare.1 I think, that I ought not to be excluded from the final elucidation of this plant as Mr Moore confided it in first instance to me. Indeed in my description of fruiting specimens only (R. S. Tasm. 17 Aug 1891) I said pointedly, that the flowers might prove the plant distinct from C. Petriei, and that in such a case the plant ought to be called C. Moorei. What I now suggest therefore, would be, that it be so named under our joint authority, and if you will write some descriptive notes and forward some flowering specimens, I will finish off by additional remarks, so that together with Mr Petries observations this Coprosma can be brought as confirmed new before the next meeting of the R.S. of Tasm.2 The ambiguity of C. Petriei even in N.Z. has not yet been cleared up, for, I feel quite convinced that the supposed red-fruited state does not belong to the genuine species
Always regardfully
your
Ferd. von Mueller.
I can send some few other notes on Tasm. plants to the RS. there for the next meeting. When will that be?3
Your specimen has not yet arrived but will probably come tomorrow.
Perhaps you will find flowers of Cymodocea.
Coprosma Moorei
Coprosma Petriei
Cymodocea
See L. Rodway to M, 14 February 1893 (in this edition as 93-12-14a).
Rodway described 'C. moorei, F.v.M.' in some Botanical Notes that he read to the Royal Society of Tasmania on 14 November 1893 (Papers and proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania, 1893, p. 179). Having reported M's initial tentative identification of the plant as C. petriei and the subsequent recognition, once specimens were found in flower, that it was a distinct species, Rodway went on that 'with von Mueller's sanction, I have described it under the name of its original discoverer'.
At a meeting of the Council of the Royal Society of Tasmania in June a letter, not found, was received from M stating that he was preparing a paper for the Society (RSA/A/5, minute book, Monthly Meeting of Council, 5 June 1893, Royal Society of Tasmania Archives, Hobart). However, no paper on Tasmanian plants by M was presented to the Society after B92.13.04, in which he noted under Coprosma Petriei, 'Should the Tasmanian plant, after the flowers have become known, prove a peculiar species, then such ought to be distinguished under the finder's name [T. B. Moore]'.
Please cite as “FVM-93-02-16,” 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