[From the ANNALS AND MAGAZINE OF NATURAL HISTORY /or July 1848.] 



THE remarks of Dr. Mantell in the ( Annals of Natural History ' 

 of the present month call for a few brief observations from me. 

 I must always regret a difference of views from any one for whom 

 I have a respect, and especially with whom I have been in 

 habits of friendly intercourse, when, but only when, any feel- 

 ing of reserve or asperity arises out of that difference of views 

 instead of the cordial desire for still further discussion and in- 

 vestigation, and so getting, in the end, nearer to the truth. 



Dr. Mantell imputes to me presumption in stating that " the 

 field was an entirely untrodden one and the task a new one," 

 and that " the nature of this class of animals was totally un- 

 known before." I wish to make two answers to this imputation ; 

 first, as regards an implied denial of justice to himself; second, 

 as to the matter of fact. 



First, as to my notice of Dr. Mantell himself. In pp. 1 and 2 

 I use the following language. Having named Dr. MantelFs 

 paper in the ' Linnsean Transactions ' I add : " That paper was 

 but one among the many results of the indefatigable labours of 

 its author in a field then little trodden and by few feet. * * It 

 can be no reflection on the Discoverer of the Wealden and First 

 Investigator of the Chalk to show that, amid the multitude of 

 objects which engaged his attention, one was not followed out 

 exhaustively." Again, on entering on the classification, I use, at 

 p. 50, the following words : " I have been unwilling, out of re- 

 spect for the many labours of Dr. Mantell in the field of palaeon- 

 tology, to reject, as others have done without assigning any rea- 



