182 m. B. T. Lowne on the 



Ibid. (p. 860). 



Microporella Fuegensis, Busk (sj).). 



This is not a Microporella^ as it wants the sub)ral [)i)re 

 characteristic of this genus. It is furnished with the pjrisfco- 

 niial pore, which is a leading character of Busk's A'lronelli ; 

 but this has a totally different structural sigulticancc. 



As there is considerable doubt about the latter genus, [ 

 shall postpone the discussion of the systematic [)lace of the 

 present form. 



[To be continued.] 



XXV. — .1 Reply to some Observations on the Mouth-organs of 

 the Dipte'ra. By B. THOMPSON Lowne, F.L.S. 



Mr. Charles O. Waterhouse in the January number of 

 this Journal appears to invite me to reply to what, for want of 

 a better term, 1 may designate a " quip courteous," in which 

 he has availed himself of the saving qualities of an " if." 



My critic has, curiously enough, seen more in my book than 

 I ever wrote or intended, and has failed to see what I did 

 write ; therefore I avail myself of an " if." 



If Mr. Waterhouse had used no more acumen in the inter- 

 pretation of the mouth-parts of the Diptera than he has 

 brought to bear on the interpretation of what I have said I 

 should not have been surprised that he still holds the old and 

 time-honoured opinions regarding the mandible of the dipte- 

 rous mouth. I do not, however, for a moment suppose that 

 lie reads " Nature " as carelessly as he reads my work ; but 

 I think he might have rewarded the " skill and care " which 

 he credits me with by a little more attention before he con- 

 signed me to oblivion in the pit of error in some unknown 

 region ; for if I have fallen into " some error," the nature of 

 which is not even indicated, my position is no better, and 

 there is small chance that a passing friend may draw me out. 

 Therefore it behoves me to make an effort to save myself. 



The main argument I use in favour of the views I liave 

 adopted is the manner in which the parts in question are 

 developed. If I have falsely interpreted the appearances 

 relating to their development 1 am as likely to be wrong as 

 another; therefore the question at issue is: Are the mouth- 

 parts ot Musca developed as Mr. Lowne states or are they 

 not? There are no side issues to the question. 



