MITTELASTRA AKD BUBACBK. 231 



cretion of evasion ; who will say the point was left out of view 

 because of its obvious fatality to what Mr. Eydberg was con- 

 tending for. I can and shall take my opponent's part against 

 every such probable assailant of his scientific candor and sin- 

 cerity; fori see it to be easily possible he may not have dis- 

 covered in that argument of mine anything of the pointedness 

 it carries. Its momentum as an argument lies in the difference 

 of meaning that subsists between such Latin word-endings as 

 um and us. It is evident that Latin endings indicating number, 

 gender, etc., may chance to be slow in making their several 

 impressions. Probably- not until he reads, or is told, what I 

 have said above, will it enter Mr. Eydberg's thought that Mitel- 

 lastra is not the feminine singular that he guessed it to be, but 

 a neuter plural. 



The paragraph that occupies the greater part of page 166 I 

 can make nothing of beyond a curious display of innocency of 

 the art of word construction and a medley of self-contradictions, 

 save only that into the midst of this marvel of a paragraph there 

 is thrust this refreshing bit of mother wit: " If I prefer to call 

 the old Rubus odoratus L. a raspberry-maple instead of a maple- 

 raspberry, I am well within my rights." I am truly glad of this 

 fine pronouncement, because it can not be disputed; but it can 

 never have the least bearing on the plain fact that by that 

 adjective ending um, Rubacer is a maple in its meaning. 



More than two pages are given to the statements regarding 

 the identity of Rubacer and Bossekia. They reveal to the care- 

 ful reader much more of their author's mind and purpose than 

 I shall here point out. One or two things are said in such just 

 criticism of me that, were I sensitive and vain-glorious as I 

 might be, I should feel deeply humiliated. At the same time, 

 in this part of the paper, rash and unwarranted statements fol- 

 low one upon another in continued and close succession. Here 

 is a selection from among them : 



1. " There is nothing in Necker's diagnosis that points directly 

 to Rubus odoratus." This is untrue. 



