NOTES AND MEMORANDA. 
159 
the very moderate amount of inventive faculty involved therein makes 
it easy to believe that others have conceived the same idea at the same 
time, or even before me. It is far from me to disparage the honest 
efforts of others, and to charge plagiarism on anyone ; but I believe 
I am pardonably sensitive when such a charge as is contained in the 
footnote to Dr. Hunt’s article is brought against me, a charge which, 
as you yourselves well know, is utterly groundless, and entirely 
inconsistent with the facts in the case.” 
[We have thought it but fair, as we reprinted Dr. Hunt’s paper, 
to append the above reply. The real state of the case appears to be 
that of equality between Zentmayer and Gundlach with regard to the 
question who was first ? — Ed. ‘ M. M. J.’] 
The Shower of Sand at Rome. — The ‘ Times ’ publishes the follow- 
ing note in reference to this remarkable shower which occurred on 
June 22. It is taken from the account given by an Italian priest: — 
“ The rain of sand continued, although to a smaller extent, on the 
23rd of June, on which day the heavens were deeply overcast. The 
sand fell in small perfectly spherical masses of about of an 
inch in diameter, at a maximum. It would appear that vesicular 
vapour, by the action of the wind, had cemented the grains of sand so 
as to form globules, analogously to what we see on a larger scale in 
the formation of hail. We are entitled to assert this, seeing the 
speedy disaggregation of these globules into grains of sand, when 
brought into contact with a little drop of water in the field of a micro- 
scope. The fall on the 22nd was so abundant in Rome that from the 
amount, 0 • 25 gramme, gathered on an earthenware disk of 30 centi- 
metres in radius, we argue a fall of not less than eight quintals per 
square kilometre.” The correspondent himself writes : “ I am by no 
means satisfied that the rain was of sand and water. The drops on 
my drawing paper were easily absorbed by a pocket-handkerchief, and 
left no stain on the paper ; but my drawing still bears many stains 
from drops which apparently I had not touched. Since then I have 
washed the sky over with them, and have afterwards sluiced the 
surface of the paper with water from a sponge ; yet there they remain. 
If sand they be, that material appears to have a most unusually tena- 
cious affinity for the paper. If the drops were of sand and pure water 
I should expect to find that as soon as the water had evaporated, the 
sand would no longer adhere to the paper, and that the spots would 
no longer be on my drawing.” 
Double and Single Staining Leaves. — A very useful summary of 
one of the modes of operating for this purpose is given in a letter 
addressed by Mr. R. L. Peet to the editor of the ‘ Cincinnati Medical 
Journal.’ It is of some length ; but, omitting a couple of pages which 
contain general remarks alone, the following, though long, is yet a 
useful summary. Mr. Peet, who, in writing, takes it for granted that 
the reader has had some experience of balsam-mounting, says : — The 
first thing to be gravely considered is dishes. There should be three 
glass jars, with smooth bottoms, holding half an ounce each ; two milk- 
glass jars of about the same capacity ; two morphia vials ; an earthen 
