260 Miscellaneous. 



gists have especial reasons for figuring every shell described, 

 inasmuch as that shell is not a complete organism, such as usually 

 represents a species to an entomologist or an ichthyologist. If a 

 carcinologist were required to name and describe a new crab from 

 an empty carapace shorn of its appendages, or a botanist to publish 

 a new tree from a handful of leaves, each would probably decline 

 on the ground of insufficient material; and if he yielded, say to the 

 importunity of a palaeontologist who could furnish nothing else, he 

 would endeavour to make amends for his fragmentary material by 

 figuring and describing it in the minutest detail. 



To conclude : in the army of science there is no room between an 

 honoured veteran like Mr. Smith and a tyro like myself for that 

 green-eyed monster to whom he somewhat harshly alludes. The 

 object of these remarks will have been attained if I can but induce 

 European writers to read a little more Australian scientific litera- 

 ture, to study the geography of this continent with a little more 

 care, and especially to figure every Australasian shell they describe 

 as new. 



Sydney, New South Wales, 

 November 30, 1895. 



Reply. 

 I do not propose in any way to modify or withdraw the opinion 

 expressed in the paragraph of my paper complained of by 

 Mr. Hedley, who has, however, both misunderstood and misrepre- 

 sented it. I make no general imputation against all Americans, as 

 he infers, but, from my own experience and from the testimony of 

 others, I have reason to know that a jealous feeling has been enter- 

 tained by " some." 



With regard to the title of Mr. Hedley's above remarks, I would 

 observe that I have made no accusation at all against Australian 

 writers, and my observation, " it seems almost as if the ' green-eyed 

 monster ' were tripping in the Antipodes," was a playful reference to 

 Mr. Hedley alone, and was prompted by the general tone of his 

 paper, which I thought might have been withheld until he had 

 again occasion to deal with the fauna of New Guinea. I may add 

 that if he bad been a little less precipitate he would have been 

 saved the trouble of writing his comments, for figures have since 

 been published of the species complained of. 



T may also say, in conclusion, that I do not think it would be 

 edifying to further encroach upon the valuable space of these 

 ' Annals ' with a detailed criticism of the rest of Mr. Hedley's prolix 

 remarks. A deal might be said with regard to the relative value 

 of a good description and a bad figure, of the cost of illustration, of 

 priority of publication, &c, but cui bono ? E. A. Smith. 



P.S. — Since penning the above reply specimens of Mr. Hedley's 

 Rhysota jiyensis (a synonym of which he complained of my creation 

 in R. Armiti) have been added to the Museum collection. In my 

 opinion it is merely a variety of his own R. hercules, described at the 

 same time ! — E. A. S. 



