'§!& Mr. R. i. Pocock on Ebajia nux. 



In the first place Canon Norman denies that liis words of 

 approbation for the manner in which his MS. name was 

 treated by Messrs. Marion and Milne-Edwards can be taken 

 as reflecting- discredit upon me — thereby laying me open to 

 the charge of entering upon a controversy without provoca- 

 tion, and of taking offence where none was intended. 



In reply to this I may say that if I was alone in my opinion 

 as to this allegation of discourtesy I should be compelled, in 

 the face of Canon Norman's denial, to suspend judgment on 

 the point. But since precisely the same interpretation was 

 independently put upon the sentence referred to by my friend 

 tvho first drew my attention to the publication of Mr. Bourne's 

 paper, I cannot do otherwise than retain the opinion that I 

 ^rst formed. This fact, moreover — namely the circumstance 

 that exactly the same significance was independently attached 

 to Canon Norman's words by an individual absolutely uncon- 

 cerned in the matter — goes far to destroy any semblance of 

 truth there might be in the suggestion that the idea of an 

 accusation of discourtesy is merely a product of my guilty, 

 conscience, a suggestion which would perhaps have seemed 

 plausible enough if the notion had emanated solely from 

 myself. But if further refutation of this were needed, I 

 might add that I am quite unable to see how my conscience 

 can have influenced me in the matter, for, as I carefully 

 pointed out in my last letter, my mode of employing the 

 npmen nudum — Ebalia nux — was strictly in accordance with 

 my notions of the dictates of courtesy and common sense ; 

 and consequently I had no idea that Canon Norman could 

 possibly find grounds on that score for complaining of ill- 

 treatment at my hands. In short, I do not see how I can 

 have no idea of a thing and yet be conscience-stricken with 

 regard to it. 



With regard to Canon Norman's assertion that he took 

 particular pains that his words should not bear the construc- 

 tion that was to my knowledge independently put upon them 

 on two occasions, I think the less said the better. I merely 

 refer to the circumstance now with the object of bringing it 

 before the notice of those who are interested in collecting cases 

 of the inadequacy of language to express thought. 



In the second place, in connexion with the letter that I 

 wrote to him, I can assure Canon Norman that I never 

 recei^fe.d an answer to it. The postcard that he recollects 

 sending to me I too remember well ; but it related to a species 

 of Mysis from the Firth of Clyde, and not to Ebalia nux. 

 ■ In the third place. Canon Norman wishes to know which 

 specimens of Ehalin nux I chose for description. I am sorry 



