124 #ast 55th St., New-York, 
eet Oct. Cth. 1S8s, 
- 
My dear Sir: 
yeurs in relation te “eastanogastris” is received, 
and ] think that you will findthe right track has been struck, 
1 have seen the review of Dr. C.’s deek in the Ibis, and ob- 
serve that the writer renders his opinion from a eursery examina- 
tion”, and effers some other apolegies for his kind words. His 
eritieism of Hydranassa eed is gust and natural enough, but his 
proof is net complete, as 1 had neticed before I saw what he had 
to say. He thinks that “hydronessa” vould have been the form if 
Coues’ derivation were correct, changing the a to o and second a 
f 7 — —_— — 
te ¢&, 3ut there are Greek compeunds of Hydr- whieh do take a 
wn 
instead ef ® as eonnecting vewel”, and the Nerie form of ~nessa (vacse 
Nave been used by the inventor, 3eth these are possibili- 
ties which made me hold my sudgment suspended, seeing interested 
in the matter,1 wrote to Mr, Ridgway te ask what he meant the dee 
ivation to be when he coined the yord,. He replies that Dr. 3aird 
is responsible for the form, but he feels quite sure that he meant 
te translate? into Greek Audutton’s “Lady of the Waters”, Which 
shevs that the natural derivation from ON OST O , “queen”, is 
right, and Coues™ wrong, New, this is net all. He says that 
GC, steocd as a sort of Socratic midwife to the mate, dichromanassa, 
assisting R. in bringing the pretty nies into existence, OF 
does net use these terms, but that is the idea, Now, 
