MEMORANDA. 155 
opticians, as it would be extremely difficult to determine 
whether the best objectives of A are or are not equal to those 
of B or of C. 
In Ss to my remarks on the comparison of the ;!,th 
and .1;th I believe I am correct in stating that neither the 
author of the “Remarks” nor his friend “(p. 2 4) have ever 
seen the objects on which the comparison was made ; his re- 
mark, therefore, that my =';th must have been out of order 
is not entitled to much weight, more especially as the com- 
parison was made with Dr. Beale’s ath, with which he is 
constantly working. The opinion of the “friend” that my 
ath is © certainly not to be compared with the ~,th”’ 
for the same reason equally invalid. 
Will the author of the ‘“‘ Remarks” kindly point out the 
expression from which he infers that my objective was an old 
one, with a new anterior combination ? Has the word “ origin- 
ally”? misled him? From his verbal criticism of my expres- 
sion “some,” he has deduced an inference not warranted by 
the facts themselves, although my statement of them may, 
perhaps, bear such an interpretation. ‘The jth” (p. 25, 
1. 3) can only mean Dr. Beale’s ;',th, and I have no reason to 
doubt the correctness of his remark. 
The author’s remarks are wound up with some observa- 
tions that, to my mind, are strongly suggestive of an old 
adage— Save me from my friends.””—Cuartes Brooks. 
