UCIIINOIDKA. II. 



tlie monieiit llie lainoiis Keporl on the Challenger -Echinoidea, stireK Professor A gassiz has observed 

 that 1 regard, for insiaiici-, W \ \- i 11 1- 'riumi son's work on the I'orcnpine -Ivcliinoidea as one of the 

 very best e\er published on the recent forms, and that 1 lia\e the most profound respect for Professor 

 I) (")d erl ei n's great work on the Cidarids, lor the works of Professor Koehler. and for niaii\- others 

 whom 1 might name. That I do not agree with these authors in all points, is far from implying a 

 slight appreciation of their work. As for challenging it all as worthless because it is not based uj)ou 

 my ihis) methods for the solution of all Kchinological problems , can it realh be necessary for me to 

 express my conviction that any accurate and careful scientific research retains its worth, whatever 

 method has been used? — If it be found, h()we\-er, that some structure like the ])edicellari;e is emi- 

 iieuth important for classification, then consequently no species of which the test onl\- has been de- 

 scribed (however perfect that description ma\' be) can be assigned to its definite position in the svstem 

 before that special structure has been made known. This logical conclusion is far from being that 

 implied b\- Professor Agassi z in the following remark (< )p. cit. p. iq): The height nf absurdit\- is finalh- 

 reached when we are told that ncjthing can be said of the affinities of s])ecies of which pedicellaria.' 

 have not been examined |b\- him). The word nothing!^ as used by me, \\ hen taken in reasonable 

 connection with the context, is seen to mean that one cannot sa\- with certainty to which genus such 

 a species belongs, e. g. Goniocidaris Doihrlrnii (Part I. p. 28) or Asf/i<iiosoii/a longispiintiii (Ibid. p. 561, 

 and in such places I ha\e added the words with certainty. That in any case m\' proviso applies 

 onl\' to those families in which pedicellarise are of prominent systematic importance should be self- 

 evident, but it ma\- not be superfluous to state the fact explicitlx' here. For the rest Professor Agassi z 

 will probabh' himself admit that he was not justified in designating as an absurdit\ m\' \iew that 

 .species, whose most important s\stematic characters are miknown, cannot be assigned to their true 

 position, seeing that Professor Doderlein, whom both Agassiz and I honour with the highest ap- 

 preciation for his profound and elaborate works, now also puts aside as iucrrtce scdis such species as 

 1 iorocidaris /^n/nrji/ri/sis A. Ag. and Porocidaris Slidrrcri A. Ag. on accotnit of their pedicellariie being 

 unknown, thougli they are otherwise \'er\- carefully described. (Pxhinoiden d. dt-utsch. Tiefsee- 

 Exped. p. 103.) 



To turn to m\' personal remarks, which are characterised as being entirely out of place in a 

 scientific memoir , I have already stated that I avoided personalities as far as possible, and in the 

 whole of m\- work I can recall onl\' two remarks to which Professor Agassiz might object on such 

 gromids. The studv of tlie Challenger Echinoids preserved in the British Museum has shown me that 

 Professor Agassiz has in several cases put one or more notes of interrogation on the labels in the jars, 

 but has omitted to mention in the text that tlie identification was doubtful. Without seeing the labels 

 no one woidd imagine that the published statements are really doid)tful. Thev ajjpear in the work 

 as certain facts and as such have been quoted by other authors with the consequent multiplication of 

 insecurely based conclusion.s. On this subject I observed: this way of proceeding is very objectionable , 

 ,and on p. 58: it cannot be considered to be correct > to figure details of a specimen, referred with doubt 

 to some species, without an\- reservation under the name of that species. I do not think these remarks 

 out of place, where such facts are pointed out; but it is evidently these small reflections which have 

 caused the above-cited remark of Professor Agassiz, as well as the following: Having stated in one 



