74 ALCA IMPENNIS. 
or 
Mr. John Barrow, that I received any reply. When it did come, it was 
dated Moose River, Canada West, 12 June, 1861, and was to the effect that 
he had never given a Great Auk’s egg to the United Service Museum. 
In the meanwhile [ had immediately despatched the egg to Mr. John 
Hancock, who made some admirable copies of it, one of which he was good 
enough to give tome; and I called severa} times in the autumn and winter on 
Mr. Calvert, but I was only able to see him occasionally. When I told him 
that I had had no yeply from ‘‘ Westall,” he said that he was not surprised, 
foy he thought that it was an assumed name, and that he had never seen the 
man since he bought the egg of him. I thus came to the conclusion that the 
attempt to learn more from him was hopeless, and that it was impossible to treat 
all he said seriously, for at times he had a way of talking as though be were not 
in his right mind. This behaviour had already roused my suspicion, and when 
Treceived Admiral Vidal's letter, I had no Jonger any doubt that the supposition 
of the ege having been bought at the sale of the United Service Museum, by 
someone who thereupon sold it to Mr. Caivert, could not be entertained. I had 
all along been struck by the coincidence of my having bought the egy in the 
house formerly oceupied by the late Mr. Salmon ', whose egg-collection, which 
by common report had been bequeathed to the Linnean Society, had been some 
months before declined by the Council of that body (Minutes of Council, 
5 January, 1860), to the great regret of myself and several other Fellows of 
the Society, in consequence of a condition attached to its acceptance? 
Mr. Salmon’s specimen, Mr. Calvert told me, at the time of my buying the 
eoo of him, was actually in the house; but, notwithstanding that I had seen 
it several times, I had ueyer had the opportunity of closely examining it, and 
my imprtession was that it was a different-looking egg, though I could not 
undertake to recognize it. Mr. Hancock, moreover, to whom I sent the egg so 
svon as it was mine, wrote to me that he was sure it was not that which 
Mr. Salmon had. So the matter remained in uncertainty until when, more 
than a year after, the egy had come inte my possession, Mr. Salmon’s collec- 
tion was accepted by the Council of the Linnean Society (Minutes of Coune:l, 
7 November, 1861), and the special thanks of the Society directed to be given 
to that gentleman’s executor (Proc, Linn. Soe. vol. vi. p. liv). Soon after it 
was found that no Great Auk’s egg was contained in it, and in its place was 
a Swan’s rudely spotted and blotched with ink. The conclusion then was 
not difficult to draw. It is obvious, however, that with the view of putting a 
1 (| This was, however, an accident. Mr. Champley wrote to me in August, 1862, 
that the egg had been shewn to him two years before by Mr. Calvert “in a ware- 
house in Dean Street, formerly Sir J. Banks's Museum,” saying that it had come 
from the United Service Museum.— Ep. | 
2 [In the winter of 1859-60, T had more than one interview with the officials of the 
Society, followed by a correspondence with Mr. Kippist, the Assistant Secretary, 
and Professor Bell, the President, whom I urged to take action with the view of 
securing the execution of what I believed to be Mr. Salmon’s bequest. Mr. Kippist, 
] believe, did cause enquiries to be made at Doctors’ Commons or Somerset House ; 
but found that the will had not been proved, and he informed me the Society had 
not the means to compel its proof.— Ep. | 
