PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1200, 1 March 1895, Page 31

PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.

The annual meeting- of the Wellington Philosophical Society was held at the Museum on Feb. 20, Major-General Schaw (president) in the chair. The report and balance-sheet, a precis of which has already been published, were read and adopted, on the motion of Mr W. M. Maskell, seconded by Sir Walter Buller. Dr Ewart and Messrs T. H. Asquith and G. W. Wilton were elected members of the I Society, The election of office-bearers for the ensuing year resulted as follows:—President, Mr 11.I 1 . Kirk, F.L.S.; vice-presidents, Messrs W. T. L. Travers and R. C. Harding ; council, Sir Walter Buller, Sir James Hector, Major-General Schaw and Messrs W. M. Maskell, G. V. Hudson, E. Tregear and Farquhar; secretary and treasurer, Mr R. B. Gore; auditor, Mr T- King. Sir Walter Buller read a paper on " The Vegetable Caterpillar." Mr W. M. Maskell at its conclusion read a short address, stating that in November last he gave an address at one of the j I Society's meetings on certain forms of j fungus which are useful to man by attacki ing various insect pests. Incidentally he mentioned this vegetable caterpillar, and during the discussion Sir Walter Buller fastened upon a point which was in itself entirely trivial and foreign to the object of the address, viz., whether these larvce after they were dead were still larvos or merely lumps of fungus, and it was upon that point that Sir Walter Buller's paper just read was founded. The proceedings of Sir Walter Buller with reference to that paper were so peculiar as to place him outside the pale of scientific discussion. The paper just read would appear in vol. 27 of " The Transactions of the New Zealand Institute " under the heading "Read before the Philosophical Society of Wellington, February 20th, 1895." But Sir Walter had so managed that it had already been printed some weeks ago as part of the volume. As the printing of the volume had now progressed some distance beyond it, no answer to the paper could appear in its proper place so as to be associated with it. Then, again, Sir Walter Buller had actually gone the length of stopping the printing of the volume so as to obtain advance proofs of the paper, in order that he might distribute them, and it followed that some weeks before the paper was read, and before anyone could have had any opportunity of replying to it, Sir Walter had

been enabled to scatter it broadcast over the world. The proceedings he had indicated were su peculiar, so contrary to all the ethics of scientific controversy, that he scarcely knew what terms to apply to it. He was certain no member of the Board of Governors of the New Zealand Institute would have agreed to this paper being printed before it was read. He found no fault with the manager of the Institute or the editor of the volume. The fault lay with the person who proposed the arrangement. Sir Walter Buller was a member of the Royal Society of England, and it would be his (Mr Haskell's) duty to draw the attention of the secretary of that Society to these facts, and to ask whether they were in accordance with the proceedings and custom of the Royal Society. Finally, he remarked that Sir Walter Buller had been elected a member of the council of the Philosophical Society. He (Mr Maskell)' was a member of the council, but in view of the facts he had just stated, he should be obliged fco formally resign his position as a member of the council. Sir Walter Buller, in reply to what he characterised as a puerile and childish speech, said that in the course of Mr Mask ell's paper which he had referred to, Mr Maskell misdescribed the caterpillar, and he (Sir Walter) told him so, and endeavoured to put him right. He (Sir Walter) subsequently took the course of submitting the caterpillar to the Government analyst, with the result he had described in the paper. The paper he had just read was declared fit to be printed in the "Transactions." It was forwarded by him to Sir James Hector, and it was no suggestion of his that it should appear in the volume. It w?.s Sir J. Hector's suggestion that all his papers should be printed together in the Department of Zoology, so as to get on with the volume. It was Sir James Hector who put " 20fch February " at the head of the paper, and Mr Bothamley sent him proofs for correction. He used no influence at all with Sir James Hector„ who himself prepared a list and arranged that all his (Sir Walter's) papers should appear together. He denied the suggestion that Sir James Hector would do anything wrong in a matter of that kind to give him an advantage over Mr Maskell or any other member of the Society, and he entirely denied all the imputations Mr Maskell had made. Some discussion followed, and it was eventually decided that the secretary should enter Mr Maskell's remarks in the minutes, together with a written reply to be supplied by Sir Walter Buller. Subsequently Mr Maskell consented to hold over his resignation until the next meeting of the Society. Papers were contributed by Sir James Hector, Messrs C. Smith, H. C. Field (two papers) and G. V. Hudson, Major Gascoyne (communicated by Sir Walter Buller) and Mr T. Kirk (three papers). The proceedings concluded with a hearty* vote of thanks to Major-General Schaw for the able manner in which he has carried out the duties of president. ' ,

After the somewhat heated discussion at the meeting last week, the Society resolved that Sir Walter Buller should be allowed to reply in writing for record in the minutes. We have received a copy of that reply as handed in to the secretary. It is as follows: Mr W. M. Maskell having made a very intemperate and wholly unjustifiable attack upon me, I desire to have .the following remarks in reply entered in the minutebook of the Society. 1.1 deny that my paper on Cordiceps robertsii" is a "controversial" one, of a. kind rendering it unfit for publication in our " Transactions." The point on which Mr Maskell and myself differed at a former meeting was as to whether the so-called vegetable caterpillar was animal, or vegetable, or both. Some days after the discussion, Mr Maskell informed me that he had made a careful microscopic examination, and had found that the skin or outside intee-ument of the caterpillar was all animal substance. Declining to accept this assurance, I forwarded a specimen to Sir James Hector officially, with a request that he would get it analysed by the public analyst "for the purpose of ascertaining its true constituents." Mr Skey reported in due course that " the skin does not give any indication of the presence of chitine or other animal substance." I published that rej)ort without note or comment. There was, therefore, nothing controversial in the nature of the paper. It was a mere record of an ascertained fact; and our Society exists for the purpose of elucidating the truth in such matters. 2. 1 had no voice in determining whether that paper should be printed in the " Transactions" or not. That was decided by the Board of Governors, of which Mr Maskell is himself a member. 3. I deny that I have " gone the length of stopping the printing of the volume " until the author's copies of my papers had been supplied to me; and I have tho authority of the Government Printer for the statement that the printing of my copies did not delay the general work for a moment, as they were waiting for " copy." 4. I deny that I had anything to do with placing " Read on February 20" at the head of my paper. The note is in Sir James Hector's hand-writing, and was put on without any reference to me.

5. I deny that I had anything to do with the order in which say ten papers should come in the volume, that being at the dis-

cretion of the manager of the Institute, Sir James Hector, who did not think it necessary to consult me on the subject. 6. .1 deny absolutely that by reason of what was done, " some weeks before the paper in question was read, some weeks before anybody .could have had an opportunity of replying to it, he (meaning myself) had been enabled to scatter it broadcast over the world with a heading indicating, what is not the case, that it has been already read before this Society." The author's copies were not delivered to me till the afternoon of the 20th, and not a single copy was issued till after the paper had been read on the evening of that day. 7.1 repudiate and resent as insulting Mr MaskelFs suggestion that I was " closeted for an hour " (as he expressed it) with Sir James Hector before that gentleman went South, and was " using my influence with him to secure an unfair advantage over the other members of the Society." Sir James Hector did, on the occasion referred to, inform me that the printing of the \ volume this year would be pushed on with earlier than usual, and he stated the reason: that he might be able to supply Mr Maskell with author's copies of his own papers in time for the Science Association Meeting' in Australia. He said that accordingly Mr MaskelFs papers would come first, and that mine would follow. I had no voice in this, nor had I any request to make or favour to ask. 8. The proofs of my papers were corrected by me at Sir James Hector's request, this having been my practise for years past. The original of my paper on Cordiceps robertsii, previously marked by him for the 20th, was handed back by me to Sir James Hector himself. , These then are the " proceedings " which Mr Maskell says " are so peculiar, so contrary, to all the ethics, as one may say, of scientific controversy that I scarcely know what terms to apply to them." After formulating the puerile charges which I have now categorically denied, Mr Maskell announced that he would not sit on the council with me. I declined at the meeting of the 20th to be put in nomination for the presidency, and I begged hard to be excused from taking any official posi-) tion, because of the uncertainty of my stay in New Zealand. But as the Society kindly insisted on electing me to the council, I shall serve in that capacity to the best of my ability, without caring in the least whether Mr Maskell resigns or not. As to Mr MaskelFs impertinent threat that he will report the "facts" to the Royal Society of London, of which I have the honour to be a Fellow, all I can say is that I do not know by what right he claims the privilege of approaching that august "body; but he may rest assured that, if necessary, this repudiation of his groundless charges will be duly recorded there. : ■ (Signed) Walter L. Btjlleb. Wellington, February 22, 1895.