a peculiarly capricious estimate of the whole subject. He has in short, so clouded the outlook of otherwise clear premises that, in the name and interests of truth, I venture this protest. In the course of submitting the following numerical tables illustrative of the original system of Maori numeration, I propose to demonstrate that Mr. Best's observations on (a) the numeral prefix are entirely inadequate, and that those on (b) the term ngahuru and (c) the term tekau require considerable modification. (a.). The Numeral Prefix. Mr. Best states, “To the above terms [tahi, rua, toru, &c.] various prefixes are applied. When using any of these expressions for numbers in conversation, or when enumerating articles, the term ko is prefixed to the first, which thus becomes kotahi. From two to nine inclusive the prefix is e. To ngahuru no prefix is applied as a cardinal, but as an ordinal tua is so employed: tua-ngahuru = tenth. Tekau, the modern term for ten, never bears a prefix, the ordinal being expressed by the use of the definite article: te tekau = the tenth. Thus we have the cardinal numbers as follows:- “Ko-tahi = one E-rua = two E-toru = three E-wha = four E-rima = five E-ono = six E-whitu = seven E-waru = eight E-iwa = nine Ngahuru, or tekau = ten as used in Maori. These terms are often used when counting. But an ancient and more correct style of actual enumeration is by prefixing ka to the numerals. Probably, however, ka is not a true prefix in this case for my own part, I do not so regard it, “&c. That extract in itself justifies my statement that the writer held a very capricious estimate of the special knowledge peculiarly required in this particular matter. In the first place, kotahi means single and alone rather than one of a series—as, one, two, three. We may speak of kotahi, single one; of kotahi tekau, a single ten; of kotahi rau, a single hundred; and of Kotahi mano, a single thousand: but not of kotahi as a first one, as a precursor to some following number. For that very reason, kotahi is not used by competent speakers where such a thing as progressive numeration follows. The prefix e of his example is derived, as I shall presently show, from a different source altogether. The numeral prefix e, which speaks in the plural sense, is derived from he, which speaks in the singular sense. Thus: He-tahi, e-rua, e-toru, and so on. Ka, too, as we shall presently see, is an undoubtedly proper and true numeral prefix. As to numeral prefixes not applying to the terms ngahuru and tekau, I will presently show that most, if not all, numeral prefixes do properly so apply. But first I would submit that the Maori language is a scientific language—that it is not a fabric of merely adventitious texture. By way of illustrating this, let us for a moment consider such well-known terms as arero, reo, korero = the tongue, the voice, to speak. To the Maori ear a relationship is set up of these terms by the similitude of sounds and letters. This similitude, I submit, is intentional. Moreover, it is an indisputable fact that the Maori has given a different name to every species of bird, fish, tree, shrub, plant, weed, stone, cloud-formation, colour and tint, cardinal and intermediate wind-point—in short, to the sum total of visible phenomena as known to him—without either repetition or confusion. In the same sense, the various stages of a progressive action, from simple to