The recent attempt I have made to show that the absolutely unanimous adverse criticism of Dean Buckland has arisen from a misapprehension of the facts of the case, has led me to enquire further whether the same cause may not account for far more important results in other similar cases, e.g., the attacks of Huxley on Bacon; of Lord Kelvin on Huxley; and of Lord Kelvin and Professor Sollas on Lyell: attacks which cannot fail to lead the unlearned to believe, not that the critics are right, but that all are wrong together, and unworthy of attention.