Mr. HolVs Letter to the Editor. 643 



" P.S. I have sent Mr. Wood the above, who adds the 

 following : — 



" « P. S. I have not yet seen the Magazine of Natural History 

 for October, but presume that the "paragraph" alluded to is 

 that relating to advertisements. It may therefore be neces- 

 sary to state, in a kw words, that Messrs. Whittaker and Co. 

 have nothing whatever to do, directly or indirectly, with the 

 editorship of the Naturalist ; and that I alone am the re- 

 sponsible conductor of the work. — Neville Wood, October 3. 

 1837.'" 



It appears from the above, that Mr. Morris fully admits 

 the culpable conduct of another party ; the purport of this 

 letter being to exonerate himself, and to show that the credit 

 of removing the mistatement from the cover of the Naturalist 

 is due to his interference, and not, as we naturally supposed, 

 to Messrs. Whittaker and Co. How far Mr. Morris, as pro- 

 prietor of the Naturalist, can deem it consistent with his cha- 

 racter as a clergyman, to employ an editor who has been month 

 after month reprinting a falsehood, and who, in the most un- 

 blushing manner, comes forward to take upon himself the sole 

 responsibility of so doing, is a matter which we leave to Mr. 

 Morris and his conscience to settle. 



We, perhaps, ought to apologise to our readers, for intro- 

 ducing into the pages of the Magazine of Natural History 

 the following letter from Mr. Holl (ex-editor of the Natu- 

 ralist, and joint editor with Mr. Neville Wood of the Analyst) ; 

 but, under all the circumstances of the case, we have no other 

 course to adopt : — 



" Sir, I have this moment had the Magazine of Natural 

 History for October placed in my hands ; and, on glancing 

 my eye over the contents, I perceive you have thought proper 

 to publish a letter (of which I disclaim all previous know- 

 ledge) with my name attached. 



" To your scurrility and abuse I am perfectly indifferent; and 

 I am doubtful whether a man who has made himself so tho- 

 roughly contemptible is worth the trouble of addressing; but, 

 as you know perfectly well I have had no interest or connex- 

 ion, either directly or indirectly, with the Naturalist, since the 

 publication of the sixth number, your mixing up my name in 

 your animadversions on the work evinces conduct so vindic- 

 tive, base, and dishonourable, that it will be matter for future 

 consideration whether I shall not take further notice of your 

 proceedings. 



6i I shall transmit a copy of this communication to Mr. Lou- 

 don, whose kindness of heart and gentlemanly feeling (quali- 



3 a 2 



