ANECDOTA.

Pahiatua Star and Eketahuna Advertiser, Volume 5, Issue 409, 4 July 1890, Page 2

ANECDOTA.

“ You have an immense fault which will close all doors against you ; you cannot converse for two minutes with a fool without shewing him that he is one.” Therese Raqum.

This paragraph and a few more should really have a sub-headmg in small capitals " Destructor ” and a motto “ Rubbtsh shot here.” This would at first sight please the Napier News, as the most ordinary reporter Bees at once a fine opening for a feeble gibe, but at second reading fill the editor's heart with the pangs of immediate dissolution. Take heart, fearful saint. The particular kind of rubbish I ani going to shoot is of a much more honorable and be-titled sort than you. Call Sir James Hector.

A short tune ago Mr King gent this distinguished naturalist, who pockets some £ISOO a year for running New Zealand science, a specimen of some " worms” in a pigeon’s breast. Sir Janies replied that he could only see a clot of blood and matter. This is good enough for Mr King, no doubt, who thinks Sn Jamas an immense swell, and will humbly sit down and confess that he (Mr King) can’t tell living norms from "mutter." But a scholar, it I repeat the words " quidqnid Uehrant regus " (Mr King's filly) will go on • I'lectuntur Achivi " (makes' a fool of the Greeks). Now lam for the nonce u G e«i, and I beg to sav that Mr King was gmity of no folly. His “ worms ” were obviously au aberrant form of Acarid. They are known to every tiro in anatomy at home. I’oor old George Rollestou knew them very well, and so did all his pupils, including my very humble self. As for Hector, I can only say “ quantum mutatus ab tlio Hectore .” f remember him in England long ago when I was a mere boy. Even then, I noted with surprise that he had never heard of the /learids as being quite distinct from insects. I supposed it was simply from lack of the scientific training that one gets at a proper anatomical school. I put him down as u colonial who had somehow scraped through a degree at some place like Edinburgh. But now, he not only has learnt nothing, but exposes his ignorance to the public in a way that shows how utterly numbing these imperial lilies are. Sir James, forsooth !

Allow, however, if you like, that some mistake has occurred, and I shall place

Sir Janies in the dock en another charge. A book called " I lie Aryan Maori " lies before me. It is written by aMr Tragear, and issued by the Government Printer. Will Sir James deny that he was a party to tins disgraceful affair’.’ Mr Tregear. I presume, wrote this book to gull the pretended scientists of New Zealand. He succeeded, and a book which le nothing hut a skit or travesty was gravely pub ltailed ae a scientific work, lit order to he able to coin nice even a Government official that all this is true. I wrote to Prolessor Saves, whose name command* some respect in Europe aud Aniens*, and extract a few lines from Ins reply : *• Some time ago I ' cut lip Tregear • nonsense m an unsigned article which I sent to the Academy, but l don’t know whether it has yet appeared or whether the Editor thinks the book too bad to do noticed." 1 sent Sayre a criticism of Tregear'* book written by a Mr Atkinson of Nelson as evidence that Hector accepted the book as genuine in defiance of existing educated opinion. Of this Snyce says, “ Atkinson's pamphlet reached me. It is sensible and to tho point : perhaps lie has chosen the most efficacious way of exposing Mr Tregtar’s rubbish." But I base not nearly done with Sir Jauies. His “ hubris ”or infatuated pusumption —the Greek term 1 was obliged to use, as ws have no English equivalent —leads him into paths that wind close to the edge of what is punishable by law. To allow Government funds to be used to publish Tregear * rubbish may be called mere laxity ; what if we find thnl if tlio revenues of the museum are swelled liy unlawful means ? A Wellington corre pou lent who called at the museum and Asked for the last balance-sheet showing the receipts and exfieiiditiire el tne x'i4omal laboratory aaftcl.l by the oil) *r m charge, Mr Gore, that it was puhhslicd by the Treasury. " This," ii»v correspondent adds, “ is ridiculous, and no doubt aai.t at random.” My opinion is that Gore replied as instructed, and the deliberate intention was to throw my agent on a wrong scent. The fart is that the Colonial Isib >r.i tory does analyses for money and I have the printed tariff. The charges arc extremely high; and my lielief is that these analysis* are as a rule only |>erloriued for other departments, and ths money re csived not publicly accounted for at all. In order to show some grounds I will go through a correspondence now before me. Pablo to Laboratory, October 30, 1889. Please examine this flour ami compare it with any well-known brand. Is it wrong in any way? Laboratory to Pablo, Dei. 10. 1889.—Flour all right. Analysis too tedious and costly. Pablo to laboratory, Dec. 23, 1889.—Vour report not detinue enough. Customers wont buy flour. We want the precise difference between this and roller brands, such ns Snow Drop. Laboratory to Pablo. January 27. 1890. Defect may bo prejudice, in which case analysis is powerless to detect supposed difference. Pablo to Laboratory, Feb. 3, 1890.—W0 dont want you to detect a supposed difference; we want to know whether there really is any difference. Miller to Laboratory, April 10, 1890. Why dont you answer Puhlo ? 1 want my flour analysed. Reply at once. Miller to Laboratory, May 12, lH'.H).—lt" you don't reply I shall report you to Minister. Laboratory to Miller, Si r. 15. 1890.—We did reply by letter. Miller to Laboratory, Mav 15. 1890.—What will analysis cost ? Laboratory to Miller, misdated April 15, should be Mav 15, 1890. We replied to yours of 10th April by telegram thus: “Flour will lie analys'd, etc." Miller to Chief Postmaster, Napie *. - —Where is Hector's missing letter? Chief Postmaster to Miller. —Can't sav. Miller to Chief Postmaster, Mav 21, 1899. —Hector now says it was a telegram, t enclose a copy. Did he send it on 14tti April as he alleges ? Mi ller to Chief Postmaster, June 12, 1890.—Was that telegram ever sent ?

In the end the analysis was performed. The correspondence extended from October 1889 to June 1890. The cost was £3 3s for analysing three samples. Now will any reader who has jierusi-d this corn ipondence. the most remarkable example of intentional circumlocution ever published, say that analyses are as a matter of fact commonly performed for the public ? Exactly as on a previous occasion Collins compelled the railway' to carry Ins parcel and yet was outwitted by Maxwell, here Miller •,‘oiupols Hector to analyse flour, but is put to the expense and delay of a eorrespotrdence extending over eight months, and is in the end charged £3 3s. In a respectable privato laboratory tho whole transaction could have been completed within a few hours. It amounts to this, that Miller has been outwitted. Vet his crime was only that of insisting on the due performance of a paid official s duty. As to Hi c or’s misdating a letter, mis-wiring 'letter’ for ’telegram' and the Chief Fostinaster s attempt to evade the questions asked him, these are all obviously deliberate and successful attempts at obstruction and procrastiuatio:i. Am I then too severe if I say tlmt grounds exist for believing that the present managenient of the Laboratory is incompetent and the finance dishonest ? Pablo.