Though we are therefore unable to make clear many points referred to, the letter seems to us on the whole so interesting that it is printed with the omission of only one unimportant sentence.
The subjects dealt with in the letter are those which were occupying Hooker's attention in relation to his "Flora Antarctica" (1844).) I must thank you once again for all your documents, which have interested me very greatly and surprised me.

I found it very difficult to charge my head with all your tabulated results, but this I perfectly well know is in main part due to that head not being a botanical one, aided by the tables being in MS.; I think, however, to an ignoramus, they might be made clearer; but pray mind, that this is very different from saying that I think botanists ought to arrange their highest results for non-botanists to understand easily.

I will tell you how, for my individual self, I should like to see the results worked out, and then you can judge, whether this be advisable for the botanical world.
Looking at the globe, the Auckland and Campbell I., New Zealand, and Van Diemen's Land so evidently are geographically related, that I should wish, before any comparison was made with far more distant countries, to understand their floras, in relation to each other; and the southern ones to the northern temperate hemisphere, which I presume is to every one an almost involuntary standard of comparison.

To understand the relation of the floras of these islands, I should like to see the group divided into a northern and southern half, and to know how many species exist in the latter-- 1.

Belonging to genera confined to Australia, Van Diemen's Land and north New Zealand.
2.