24.0 BOTANY OF VICTORIA. 
a large quantity of Atherosperma bark. He praises it highly as a re- 
medy in bronchitis, and I had myself an opportunity of becoming ac- 
quainted with its tonic properties. I have no doubt it contains an 
alkaloid of its own. It ought to be subjected to a good quantitative 
chemical analysis, and also be examined by medical gentlemen attached 
to hospitals, as it would perhaps form a precious article of export for 
at least four colonies. From Dr. Harvey I heard a few days ago: he is 
soon returning to this Colony, so that I can enjoy again his instructions 
and company. He discovered on these shores no less than four new 
genera of Alge: is that not glorious? 
This week Stuart, the Van Diemen’s Land collector, goes at my e 
pense to New Zealand. I directed him to the Middle Island, and it 
wil give me much satisfaction to be able to increase thus your own 
stock of New Zealand plants. A few days ago I received also Dr. 
Meisner's remarks on my collections of Profeacez, Thymelace, and Poly- 
gonec, going as far as 1852. I must candidly confess my regret that 
this active and acute botanist does not take a more enlarged view of the 
variations of species. Our science becomes more and more encumbered 
with synony#® ; and in instances as Grev. Australis and G. truncifolia, 
Dr. Hooker’s opinions, based upon so much more ample material, ought 
. mot to have been disregarded. I also regret to see nearly all my old 
names now in print. Most of these names have been year's ago replaced 
_ by more correct ones; they originated mostly when I was very inex- 
. perienced here, and much more in want of books than now, and were 
_ only intended to serve in lieu of numbers, which by a slight inaccuracy 
3 lead at once to mistakes. I write by this mail also to Dr. Sonder, to 
. make some observations that may be in time for De Candolle's Pro- 
dromus, and to give him also more information on the range of the 
. species over the country. 
~ I may be permitted to make in this letter a few passing remarks 
On these points. Meisner’s Grevillea triternata is my G. nutans. 1 
. really believe the species is good, and I think the name might -be al- 
tered now to thyrsantha. G. pubescens (non Hook.) is G. Latrobii, var. 
pubescens. I doubt also the distinction of G. rosmarinifolia and G- 
: Latrobii. G. Stuartii Y think is a variety of G. Australis. G. micrantha = 
_G. parviflora (First Report, p. 17 : and I think also Hakea stricta = H. 
leucoptera, Sec. Gen. Rep., an R. Br.?) Miihlenbeckia parvifolia =M. 
— Banksia prionophylla— B. Cunninghami ? Pimelea dichotoma Y 
