Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology 9 



trace the matter and let you know what I learn. My original 

 paper has just been published by the Academy. I send you a 

 copy under separate cover. 



Very sincerely yours, 



(Signed) J. Van Dknburgii. 



It seems hardly worth while to comment upon these writ- 

 ings. I have never had the privilege of meeting Dr. Van Den- 

 burgh nor have I ever, so far as I am aware, seen Dr. Thomp- 

 son. I think I may truthfully say that I received ihe four 

 publications with my mind absolutely free from personal bias. 

 J have undertaken to i)ut these notes on record at the request 

 of several scientific friends as an aid to the naturalists of the 

 future, who will surely be sadly confused by this curious litera- 

 ture. I take no sides and make no attempt to pass judgment 

 on the reasons for the identity of the names in Dr. Thomp- 

 son's and Dr. Van Denburgh's brochures. One attitude of 

 mind wall, however, be condemned by all and will be considered 

 at least of doubtful ethics, and that is the proposal and publica- 

 tion of scientific names with the assertion attached that the 

 describer himself did not believe in their validity and only 

 named them because, as Thompson says, "one can safely 

 prophesy that ere long the specimens '■' * * will appear under 

 a subspecific alias"' and that "due provision is made"' in naming 

 the separated Riu Kiuan Achaliinis spi)uilis; when we read 

 with the same breath that "These differences are not regarded 

 as of specific value." Further remark is unnecessary. 



