748 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLI. No. 1064 



theological or philosophical. The only ad- 

 verse criticism that I ever heard passed 

 upon their use of time was that they often 

 wasted it in argument over questions 

 which, however they might be settled, if 

 they ever were settled, would not advance 

 human knowledge appreciably, or improve 

 human practise materially. It must be re- 

 membered, however, that they were both 

 prodigious workers and that their argumen- 

 tation was about their only recreation. 

 They did not smoke, and, indeed, were ab- 

 stemious in all their habits, except in the 

 matter of debate. 



Professor Verrill's memory for details 

 was almost uncanny. It was generally be- 

 lieved among us younger men that he could 

 tell correctly at any time the exact number 

 of spines on any parapodium on any species 

 of annelid that he had studied, and he had 

 studied those of the New England coast so 

 effectually that no one has attempted to do 

 much in a systematic way since his time. 

 It was a matter of surprise to those who 

 came to know him well to discover in him 

 a kindly heart and a genial nature. It is a 

 pleasure to record that he is still vigorous 

 and complaining, as usual, because there 

 are not more than twenty-four hours in the 

 day. Professor Sydney Smith, too, is still 

 much alive, and in spite of the great afflic- 

 tion in the loss of his sight, is still un- 

 quenchably bright and cheerful. 



A peculiarity which Professor Verrill 

 possessed as an arguer may be commended 

 to any who may have to play the part of 

 disputant. No matter what the nature of 

 the interruption might be, or how often the 

 interruptions were made, he never allowed 

 them to divert him from the main course of 

 his argument. I have often heard Mr. 

 Sanderson Smith engaged in a furious de- 

 bate with Professor Verrill, generally dur- 

 ing the progress of dinner, where the fury, 

 however, was all on the one side, and mani- 



festing itself in frequent and energetic in- 

 terruptions and expostulations, during 

 which Professor Verrill would patiently 

 pause, and, after the breath of his opponent 

 was exhausted, take up his argument where 

 it had been interrupted, and, with even 

 voice, continue as if nothing had been said 

 on the other side. By and by, at the proper 

 place he might reply to the interjected 

 arguments. 



Eichard Eathbun was working in the lab- 

 oratory in those days. His special interest 

 then was in parasitic copepods. He was a 

 most industrious worker and smoked an 

 amazing number of cigarettes while at 

 work. His tireless industry in those days 

 was prophetic of his subsequent, indefatig- 

 able, vacationless, administrative labors to 

 which the splendid achievements of the Na- 

 tional Museum are in no inconsiderable 

 degree due. 



George Brown Goode was one of the most 

 well-balanced minds it has been my priv- 

 ilege to know. I remember very well his 

 wonderfully clear and honest eye, his great 

 expanse of forehead, his ready and intelli- 

 gent interest in what we younger men were 

 working at, his wise and stimulating sug- 

 gestions. It is much to be regretted that he 

 had not been chosen by one of the great 

 universities, where, in surroundings less 

 permeated with administrative detail, he 

 might have developed the talents which I 

 am sure would have made of him a great 

 teacher, with a longer span of life than was 

 his portion. 



John A. Eyder, the most gifted, the most 

 original, the most profound, the most un- 

 conventionally human of them all, withal a 

 most likable man, stands out prominently 

 among the workers at the Fish Commission 

 laboratory in the 80 's. Often have I sat 

 in wonderment as I listened to his conversa- 



