102 Mr. R. I. Pocock on Ebalia mix, Milne-Edwards. 
acquainted with the facts of the case, I shall be glad to be 
permitted to say a few words on my own behalf to clear away 
any misapprehension that may have arisen. 
When writing a report upon the Crustacea dredged by Mr. 
Green off the south-west coast of Ireland, I was naturally 
desirous of giving a reference to the original description of 
Ebalia nux — one of the species obtained. That the species 
had been described I did not at first for a moment doubt ; 
for in more than one case I saw it quoted as Ebalia nux , Nor- 
man, without any insertion of the letters MS. Anyone, I 
think, who will take the trouble to u look up ” the species in 
the i Museum Normanianum,’ in the Brachyura of the c Chal- 
lenger,’ and in the first three of the works mentioned by 
Mr. Bourne in his useful list of the literature of the subject, 
W’ill admit without hesitation that my conclusion was the 
obvious one to arrive at ; for in every case it will be noticed 
that amongst several well-known species, to each of which is 
affixed its author’s name, Ebalia nux , Norman, is mentioned 
— just as if this species rested upon as secure a basis as the 
others and had the same right to recognition. 
Since, however, in none of these places was there a refer- 
ence to the original source of the name, I decided, very 
naturally, to apply to the fountain-head for the information I 
required. I consequently wrote to Canon Norman asking if 
he could kindly help me out of the difficulty ; but since I 
received no reply to this letter, although I retained my manu- 
script as long as was possible in the expectation of being 
favoured with one, I was obliged to have the paper printed as 
it now stands*. But whilst awaiting an answer from Canon 
Norman I had discovered that Prof. Carus, in his ‘ Prodro- 
mus,’ mentions Ebalianux , Norm., and that he inserts after the 
name the words u species nondum descripta .” This was the first 
intimation I had that the crab in question had been hitherto 
known by a manuscript name. Having learnt this, it seems 
to me that, in writing on the species, I adopted the only plan 
that common sense and common courtesy alike suggested, 
i . e. I described the species as new and gave Canon Nor- 
man the credit of it by retaining the name he proposed and 
by subjoining the words u Ebalia nux , Norman, MS.” 
How by thus acting I overstepped the bounds of courtesy 
I confess my inability to see. It appears to me that I 
gave to his species all the acknowledgment Canon Norman 
could possibly expect, and that at the same time I represented 
the facts of the case in a perfectly courteous and intelligible 
* Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. iv. pp. 425-431 (1889). 
