360 THE STUDY OF EVOLUTION 



" without rhyme or reason " that I am opposed to it. I showed that 

 his confusion of thought on this and related matters of fact is due to 

 his misapprehension of the significance of the words " variation," 

 " variability," and " adaptation." 



Dr. Adami admits the offences and the blunders to which I have 

 drawn attention ; indeed he cannot deny the plain evidence of his 

 own words. There is not (as Dr. Adami erroneously asserts) a 

 " main issue " or " main argument " beyond these facts, in which 

 I am concerned. 



When a man stands convicted on his own confession, as Dr. Adami 

 does, he either has the grace to express his regret and offer an apology 

 for his offences and blunders, or he has not. Dr. Adami has not 

 shown that grace ; until he has, I decline to pursue the matter any 

 further. He writes airily about " registering hits," and " outers," 

 and " a German naval victory " as though the College of Physicians 

 and the columns of a great medical journal were a sort of children's 

 playground in which he is at liberty to " run amok " with a pretence 

 of importance accompanied by violence to bystanders, and then run 

 away without apology or penalty. 



Even after his exposure Dr. Adami continues to write with 

 regrettable flippancy. He commences his letter to you of July 21 

 by stating that by " academic " he means a man who " is more con- 

 cerned with upholding the teaching and tradition of the schools 

 than with the advance of his subject." And then he is so far reckless 

 of his own reputation for discrimination and knowledge of character 

 as to apply this description to me. He forgets that others can 

 judge of the aptness of his definition and illustration, and also that 

 in his first lecture he ventured to invoke " the shade of Harvey," 

 one of the greatest of " academic biologists." I am, etc., 



E. RAY LANKESTER. 



LONDON, W., July 26. 



IV. FROM THE BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, AUGUST 11, 1917 



To the Editor of the British Medical Journal 



SIR It is a piteous exhibition that Sir Ray Lankester has made 

 of himself, and were it not that he has again touched upon points of 

 personal honour I would have preferred to be silent and not further 

 discover his shame. But by his deliberate misrepresentations and 

 reiterated and unfair attempts to place me in the wrong, he has left 

 me no option. He forces me to point out : 



1. That he repeats and does not withdraw his accusation " that 

 Dr. Adami erroneously claimed novelty for the view that the activities 



