HALIDAY AND LOEW 
53 
amount of work, set forth in a modest, inquiring, almost hesitating 
manner. It ends with the words: “ And trusting that you will 
kindly excuse the length and desultory style of this hurried letter 
(encouraged by your permission to address you in English), I 
remain, etc.” 
In writing such a letter Haliday may be supposed to have ex¬ 
pected a commensurate reply. The beginning of Haliday’s next 
letter (dated from London, December 11, 1847) does not show that 
this expectation had been realized : “ My last letter to you, although 
delayed in consequence of the change of Dr. Schaum’s plans (who 
originally intended to have himself conveyed it to you when he 
returned to Germany) has, however, as I understand from Mr. 
Dohrn, been transmitted to you, and I am in hopes that, when time 
allows, you will favor me with the remarks of which you have 
given me hopes, on some of the species which have been referred 
to in the letters which have passed.” Haliday gives an account of 
his visit to the British Museum and to the Linnean collection (in 
Burlington House). About the latter, he says : “ Difficulties 
(which I will not here mention in detail) exist and involve great 
loss of time in the determination of the species, and unfortunately 
and unaccountably the latter half of the Order Diptera, from 
Musca 63 (lltli Ed. Systema Naturae) are wanting. If I cannot 
find time and the requisite apparatus for going through the entire, 
I hope to determine some of the debated species.” Haliday gives 
here some instances of his identifications and continues: “ But I 
hope you will see more about this subject hereafter in the Stettin 
Journal.” (The article referred to was published, in German trans¬ 
lation, in the Stett. Ent. Zeit., 1851, p. 131-145 ) Apropos of the 
Stett. Ent. Zeit., Haliday notices in the number received by him 
Loew’s article on Ruthe’s publication on Diptera in Oken’s 
Isis of 1831 (Loew, Stett. Ent. Zeit., 1847, p. 66-71). With his 
usual candor, he at once acknowledges the right of priority of the 
name Thaumalea Ruthe over his Orplinephila, although they were 
apparently published in the same year, 1831 (I shall revert to this 
subject farther on). The letter ends with the words: “Believe 
me, with much desire to cultivate and enjoy your further corre¬ 
spondence and more intimate acquaintance, yours,” etc. 
