Abstract
ON my safe delivery, after a good deal of labour, from the perils of war, and on my arrival in London from Germany, I found your letter, enclosing a copy of Dr. J. Barker's communication as printed in your issue of the 14th ult. Dr. Barker has, apparently, no fault to find with my report, which, as a matter of necessity, could not be otherwise than imperfect. But he somewhat loftily criticises the writer of the comments on my report, who, in spite of the facetious title given to him by Dr. Barker, I believe to be a gentleman of considerable merit, and one whose comments on my correspondence appear to be always most just. Dr. Barker is right when he states that the late Earl of Derby's father did not observe the facts about the Kangaroo which he records; these were observed by the keeper of his collection, but they were placed on record by the Earl and hence the mistake. Dr. Barker seems annoyed that he should be made to appear as if he adopted the views, the absolute nonsense, of the writer whose paper he permitted to be read. Those who know Dr. Barker know what absolute nonsense it would be to believe him capable of adopting them. Yet, ought he not, as chairman, to have repudiated and refuted them? Would it not have been well if he had given the members of the learned societies, on the occasion in question, the information which he now offers to the readers of NATURE, and instead of telling them “that the actual passage of the fœtal kangaroo from the uterus to the pouch was not yet proved,” he had told them that the fact of there being such an actual passage had long since been proved; though how the actual transit, whether with the help of the mother's paws or lips, takes place, is still regarded as a matter for further observation; and so, instead of appearing to justify the reading of such a paper as the one referred to, he would from the extent of his knowledge on the subject, have reflected credit on his position, and on the societies to which he belongs, and have made, at least, an effort to advance the science he is so zealous for.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
CORRESPONDENT, Y. Our Dublin Correspondent and the Parturition of the Kangaroo. Nature 2, 313 (1870). https://doi.org/10.1038/002313c0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/002313c0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.