and his opinion was endorsed in a footnote in Maiden and 
Betche’s “Census of N.S.W. Plants” (1916). With these 
authorities behind me, I do not hesitate to say that D. 
Bowmanii is no more than a form of D. Mortii. Had it 
not been for Bentham’s mistake, I doubt whether it would 
have received even varietal recognition. 
Among Mueller ’s specimens is a form from the 
sources of the Condamine "River, labelled and described by 
him as D. Robertsii. As far as T can ascertain at present, 
this description was never published, and I had not previ- 
ously heard of it. Examination of the specimens (which 
are in better condition than any others in the collection) 
has convinced me that this is identical with the plant de- 
scribed by me (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. lib 4, 1927) as 
Z>. tenuissimvm. The description and figures indicate 
adequately I think, that the plant is specifically distinct 
from both D. BecJcleri and D. Mortii. Mueller says (trans- 
lation from Latin) : “In rocky, wooded mountains at the 
source of Condamine ’s River: Hartmann; T have exam- 
ined a cultivated specimen from the grounds of J. 
Roberts. ” Several other fragments in Mueller’s folios 
seem to me to belong to this species, which is characterised 
by extremely slender stems furnished at the joints with 
very long, persistent, almost capillary bracts. Should it 
be established that Mueller’s description was ever pub- 
lished, of course, the name J). Robertsii must supersede 
D. tennissimum. In any case, publicity should be given to 
the fact that the Baron, as far back as 1883, recognised 
the specific rank of this Queensland-New South Wales 
Dendrob. 
