374 
NATURE 
[Sept 8, 1870 
apodeictic judgments of mathematics, and that to Cam- 
bridge men other (all other?) thinkers waste their breath, 
the saying seems strong. Not to say that Cambridge 
mathematicians do not always seem to Dr. Ingleby an 
unexceptionable court of appeal in matters of philosophy, 
one does not see how they should be above listening to 
other philosophical doctrine any more than their German 
brethren. The illustrious mathematicians of this century 
in the country of Kant have not been noted for their 
readiness to accept his view of the philosophy of their 
science. (ES (Cas 
Die Zonula Ciliaris. “abilitations-schrift von Dr. Fr. 
Merkel. (Leipzig: Engelmann. London: Williams 
and Norgate.) 
IN this little pamphlet the author attempts to disprove the 
existence of the “ Canal of Petit.” He describes the 
Zonula itself as a band, triangular in section, which pass- 
ing over from the summits of the ciliary processes to the 
lens capsule embraces the edge of the lens, and becomes 
attached to both its anterior and posterior surfaces. The 
fine fibres of which the band itself is composed are in the 
anterior portion somewhat stouter, and joined together by 
an imbedding substance so as to form a membrane which 
offers abundant resistance to post-mortem changes. In the 
posterior portion the fibres are tender, free from any con- 
necting substance, and very speedily break up after death; 
they thus readily give way before insufflation or injection, 
and the cavity or canal thus artificially produced in the 
posterior portion of the zonula is that which is known to 
anatomists as the canal of Petit. Mees 
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 
[ The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 
by his Correspondents. No notice is taken of anonymous 
communications. 
The Gulf Stream 
NOTWITHSTANDING the mistakes in the botanic names in Mr. 
Groom’s letter, forwarded to you by Mr. Gray, there is no diffi- 
culty in identifying the leguminous seeds alluded to. There are 
several different kinds which are certainly brought by the Gulf 
Stream from the West Indian Islands, and the countries round 
the Gulf of Mexico, as the plants producing them are common in 
Jamaica, Honduras, Guiana, &c. They comprise the horse-eye 
bean (M/ucuna urens), the sword-bean (Zxtada gigalobium), the 
Mimosa scandens, Linn., £. Pursetha (MM. scandens, Roxb.), and 
the antidote cacoon (fewillea scandens). They are sometimes 
drifted on shore in the seed-pod, but usually the seed alone. 
In an article ‘‘ On some Economic Uses of Nuts and Seeds,” in 
my Technologist (vol. iv., p. 339), I alluded to several of the 
applications of these seeds, but the superstitious one referred to 
by Mr, Groom is new to me, although the setting the horse-eye 
beans in silver is very common for bracelets, &c. 
P. L. SIMMONDS 
The Intended Engineering College 
You were good enough to publish in NaTureE for the 18th of 
last month, a letter in which I stated what appear to me to be 
serious objections to the foundation by the Government ofa special 
college for the education of engineers for the Indian Service. 
Last week’s NATURE contains a letter on the same subject from 
Mr. W. Mattieu Williams, to which I certainly should not think 
it needful to reply if my personal opinions only were the subject 
of discussion; but, as the matter on which I ventured to address 
you is one of public importance, and was treated by me as such, 
T must ask you to insert a few additional remarks. 
The objections to the Government scheme which I have urged 
in my previous letters were two: first, that the creation of a 
Government College, which would compete on unequal terms 
with the principal scientific schools of the country, would be an 
injury to science; and, secondly, that, leaving the interesis of 
science out of the question, it would be an improper way of 
spending public money. 
Mr. W. Mattieu Williams’s way of disposing of these objec- 
tions is simple, if not very conclusive. 
It is, to take no notice | 
whatever of the second (which is, perhaps, not surprising, seeing 
that it is only Indian and not English public money which it is 
proposed to throw away), and to meet the second with what is, 
at best, a petitio princifit. Beginning with the assertion that I 
complain ‘fon most narrow and unreasonable grounds” of ‘a 
supposed intention of the Government to aid the teaching of 
science ”—whereas what I do complain of is the supposed inten- 
tion of Government to do what I believe will have the exactly 
opposite effect—he devotes the greater part of his letter, not to 
showing that my view of the probable effects of the Government 
scheme is wrong, but to a ‘‘protest against the principle upon 
which Mr, Foster's complaint is based.” According to Mr, 
Williams, this principle is, ‘‘ that Government must initiate no 
scientific effort, give no special aid or patronage to any college or 
scientific institution, lest it should assail the vested interests of 
‘institutions like University College and King’s College in 
London, and Owens College in Manchester.’” 
I will not follow Mr. Williams through his vigorous com- 
mentary upon this text, and will only remark, in the first place, 
that my ‘‘complaint” was limited to the particular case of the 
Government entering into competition with private institutions, 
to do exactly what they are doing, without reasonable expecta- 
tion of being able to do it better ; and, in the second place, that 
the ground upon which my complaint of such competition was 
based was, that it would tend to hinder the spread of scientific 
education. The fact that my own interests and those of my 
college may be more or less affected if the Government scheme 
is carried out, might be a ground of private regret, but it certainly 
would not have been a reason for asking public attention to the 
scheme through your columns. On the other hand, I do not 
consider it as a reason for being silent in regard to a matter 
which, as I believe, concerns the interests of science and of the 
public. : 
One word more. The procedure of the Government in this 
matter, without previously taking the advice of visible and re- 
sponsible scientific advisers, is a sample of a mode of conducting 
public affairs which, it appears to me, is the most serious dis- 
advantage of a public kind under which science in this country 
has to labour. What we want, even far more than the expendi- 
ture of more money upon scientific objects, is some system which 
should assure us that what is spent in the name of science is 
spent for the greatest advancement of science, according to the 
best judgment of the most competent authorities. 
G. C, Foster 
University College, London, Sept. 5 
Hollyberries and Birds 
In reply to Mr. Reeks’s question, where his opinion as to the 
relations between birds and berries seems to differ from Mr. 
Darwin’s, I think it best to allow the latter to speak for himself. 
At page 240 of ‘‘The Origin of Species” (fourth edition), after 
alluding to the part that insects play in the fertilisation of 
flowers, by their ‘‘unconscious selection” rendering them con- 
spicuous and beautiful, he continues: ‘‘A similar line of argu- 
ment holds good with many kinds of beautiful fruits. That a 
ripe strawberry or cherry is pleasing to the eye as to the palate, 
that the gaily-coloured fruit of the spindle-wood tree and the 
scarlet berries of the holly are beautiful objects, will be admitted 
by everyone. But this beauty serves merely as a guide to birds 
and beasts, that the fruit may be devoured and the seeds thus 
disseminated, I infer that this is the case from having as yet 
found in every instance that seeds which are imbedded within a 
fruit of any kind, that is within a fleshy or pulpy envelope, if it 
be coloured by any brilliant tint, or merely rendered conspicuous 
by being coloured white or black, are always disseminated by 
being first devoured.” And again (‘‘ Variation under Domesti- 
cation,” vol. ii., p. 230): ‘* The white Tartarian cherry, owing 
either to its colour being so much like that of the leaves, or to 
the fruit always appearing from a distance unripe, is not so 
readily attacked by birds as other sorts. The yellow-fruited 
raspberry, which generally comes nearly true by seed, is little 
molested by birds, who are evidently not fond of it ; so that nets 
may be dispensed with in places where nothing else will protect 
the red fruit (*‘ Bull. de la Soc. d’Acclimat.,’ tom. vii., 1860, 
p- 359). This immunity, though a benefit to the gardener, 
would be a disadvantage in a state of nature both to the cherry 
and raspberry, as their dissemination depends on birds. I 
noticed during several winters that some trees of the yellow- 
berried holly, which were raised from seed from a wild tree 
found by my father, remained covered with fruit, whilst not . 
