Ree. Sept. 19.1853 



Berlin- 0. July 20,1853 

 ("O" Stands for "East" E.D. ) 



Ans. May 18.1855 

 Most honored Sir i 



Your esteemed letter of Oct. 22, 1852 I dir! not ans wer until 

 now, because I hoped the publication of my description of Cacti would 

 not be postponed so extr^iinarly long, and I could get it to you at 

 the same tlme. Only now presents itself an opportunity as one of my 

 relatives is travelling to New York. I, therefor, send to you enclo- 

 sed several copies of the Garden-newspaper ( as I do not know, if 

 these have come to your knowledge) , in which you will find not only 

 the description of all species newly introduced by nie, , but also my* 

 views of the family of Cacti in pceneral ! in a thorough dissertatiom 



I can hardly flatter myself in the hope, that you will share 

 my views in all parts, however I did lea^n from Prin.ce Salm with 

 great satisf aotion, that you pronounced the same opinion as one d.e- 

 clared W myself in a crucial point against hira, naraely, that the di- 



Vision of the Antarothelae cannot be counted any further to the 

 Mamillariae but to the Echinocati , , - You will easily believe, deaf 

 Sir, that it is of utmost importance for me to obtain your unmitiga- 

 ted judgement about my views presented in the Garden newpaper , and 

 that I would be most oblip:ed, if you would comnunicate this in a 

 comprehensive letter - , 



As to your question, if Echlnopsls grow in Texas, I can teil 

 you, that I actually did not find any othe r Eehlnopsls there but £. 



pe^tlnata as well as varieties of it; which you in the meantime,do 

 not count any more with the Echinopsae. The reasons, which lead you 

 to form of them and others the subdivision of the Cerii; the Echino- 



Reichenbachiana , etc) fl owering in quantities.and can only say f . that 

 I did not find, that the Inf lorescenses differed in any substantiall 

 way from the smaller Echinopsae . I ^o not believe in the least,, that 



> Avif nv>nf V>«1 « ~ 



