No. 4.] DAWSON — EOZOON CANADENSE. 233 



arities of diagrams should not exceed the limits of the known 

 variability of the real specimens, but in the Eozoon diagrams of 

 Carpenter and Dawson these limits are exceeded," There could 

 not, I think, be a more plain charge of wilful falsification, and 

 this is made by a naturalist who discusses ^ozoo?i without having 

 taken the pains either to study it in situ, or to avail himself of 

 the large collections of specimens which exist in England and in 

 Canada. I can only reply that while I have been unable to 

 figure all the peculiarities of the canal systems of this complicated 

 and often badly preserved fossil, I have endeavoured to select 

 the most characteristic specimens ; and that my representations 

 are principally, nature-prints, photographs, and camera tracings, 

 some of the latter by artists in no way interested in Eozoon. Dr. 

 Carpenter's representations appear to me to be equally truthful. 

 Neither of us have taken the trouble to represent badly preserved 

 or imperfect specimens, any more than we should do so in the 

 case of any other fossil, when better examples were procurable. 



In connection with this, Moebius seems to think that in my 

 criticism I should have gone into all the details into which he 

 enters. This was unnecessary, except to expose his principal 

 errors or mis-statements. It could not have been done without 

 publishing a treatise as long and as expensively illustrated as his 

 own ; and this I should prefer to do in some other form than as 

 a mere reply to him ; and with reference to much larger and 

 more varied collections than those at his command. It is to be 

 hoped that his expectations will be satisfied in this respect by a 

 monograph which Dr. Carpenter proposes to undertake. 



He is good enough to add that if I will send him more and 

 better specimens, he will willingly '' forgive " me for " disappoint- 

 ing " him and other naturalists. I must say that I cannot pur- 

 chase forgivenness on such terms, but if he will take the trouble 

 to visit Canada and inspect my collections, he shall have every 

 opportunity to do so. 



I think it is only due to the interests of palseontological science 

 to add here, that I attach more blame to the editors of the Ger- 

 man publication " Palaeontographica," in which his memoir ap- 

 pears, than to Prof. Moebius himself. We have been in the 

 habit of regarding this publication as one in which the matured 

 results of original observers and discoverers are given, and when 

 it devotes 40 costly plates to the labours of a naturalist who is not 

 of this character, in so far as Eozoon is concerned, and who has 



