00 FroceecUuf/s of the Royal Society of Victoria. 



correctly applied to a female containing lai'ge but un- 

 developed eggs in the uterus ; nothing is said l:)y Mr. 

 Fletcher about the embiyos. 



Mr. Fletcher may personally have had abundant evidence 

 that the New South Wales Feripatiis was viviparous, but 

 that evidence was not published and not known to me when 



1 wrote, and, therefore, I consider that I was quite justified 

 in stating that the mode of reproduction of F. leuckartii 

 was unknown, and in placing my own interpretation upon 

 the only i-ecorded facts as to the life history of the New 

 South Wales form. Naturally 1 interpretated them in the 

 Ught of my own observations on the Victorian species. 

 That interpretation I now fully admit to be incoi-rect and I 

 congratulate myself that if my observations have had no 

 other good result they have at least elicited some definite 

 information as to the mode of reproduction of the New 

 South Wales Feripatiis. 



(4) Mr. Fletcher seems to be very greatly troubled because 

 my statements are already " finding their way into the 

 records of zoological literature, and confusion and mis- 

 apprehension may result therefrom." There is not the 

 slightest need for confusion now that we have at length a 

 definite statement as to the reproduction of the New South 

 Wales species. It must be perfectly obvious to ever}^ reader 

 that my own observations were based entirel}^ on Victorian 

 specimens, as stated distinctly in the paper, and that my 

 suggestion as to the New South Wales form was a perfectly 

 justifiable, though, as it turns out, incorrect deduction from 

 the only published facts. It is perhaps unfortunate that 

 both the New South Wales and Victorian forms should 

 have been included under the name leuckartii, but for this 

 Mr. Fletcher himself is at least as much responsible as any 



(5) Mr. Fletcher states that the question at issue is not 

 whether or no the Victorian species is oviparous. Herein I 

 must beg to differ from him, as this is the real question 

 which I have been all along trying to solve and compared 

 with which the mere question of nomenclature is, in my 

 opinion, insignificant In concluding his observations he 

 also indulges in certain offensive and unjustifiable person- 

 alities, which I need not ([uote. It is greatly to be regretted 

 that he should have considered such a proceeding advisable 



