172 COKRESPONDENCE. 



(vide 'M.M. J.,' No. LVI., p. 98), will lie try his dialectic on the 

 following passages ? 



'M.M. J.,' No. XXII., p. 238. 

 Eev. S. L. Beakey: "The only 

 tangible result from these papers [Dr. 

 Pigott's] is the suggestion that the 

 greater brilliancy of water lenses is in 

 one case due to the fact that more of 

 the pencil of light is lost in the air 

 lens than in tlie other from totdl re- 

 flexion. This many persons may not 

 have observed, though self-evident 

 when once attention is called to it." 



' M. M. J.,' No. XXVII., p. 118. 



Mr. Wenham: ". . . . -whether the 

 object is mounted in balsam or not, I 

 challenge Dr. Pigott, or anyone, to get, 

 through the object-glass with the im- 

 mersion front, a greater angle, or any 

 portion of the extraneous rays that 

 would in the other case [i.e. with dry 

 front] be totally reflected, as no object- 

 glass can collect image-forming rays 

 beyond this limit." 



If Mr. Brakey is right in saying it is self-evident : where is Mr. 

 Wenham? But if Mr. Brakey knows that his observations must 

 coincide with Mr. Wenham's : then, where is he ? I fear in this out- 

 of-the-way place I cannot get this problem solved, I therefore ask 

 your insertion of these few lines in the hope that Mr. Brakey will 

 kindly explain how one may ; — 



" Confute, change hands, and still confute.'' 



I am, Sir, your obedient servant, 



RusTicus, jim. 



Dr. Urban Pritchard " On the Eods of the Cochlea." 



To the Editor of the 'Monthly Microycopical Journal.'' 



King's College, March 8, 1874. 



Sir, — In the Address of the President to the Eoyal Microscopical 

 Society, and in the report published in your last number, the above- 

 named paper was spoken of as if it had been read before the Eoyal 

 Microscopical Society, whereas it was a communication to the Medical 

 Microscopical Society. The error was not noticed until the Hon. 

 Secretary of the last-named Society politely called attention to it. I 

 am desired to explain that it was quite unintentional, and to request 

 your insertion of this correction. 



I am, &c., 



HENny J. Slack, Sec. R.M.S. 



Dr. Pritchard's Paper — Mr. Mayall's Letter. 



To the Editor of the ^Monthly Microscopical Journal.'' 



16, FiTZROY Square, March 13, 1874. 



Dear Sir, — My attention has been called by the President of the 



Medical Microscopical Society to the fact that, in the remarks on 



Dr. Pritchard's paper on the Cochlea comprised in my Address, I 



apparently claimed the paper as the property of our Society, by having 



