13. Whether I had not clearly defined the difference between hard and soft consonants long before Professor Whitney, and whether he has not misrepresented what I had written on the subject (p. 490);
14. Whether in saying that the soft consonants can be intonated, I could have meant that they may or may not be intonated (p. 497);
15. Whether I invented the terms vivârasvâśâghoshâḥ and saṃvâranâdaghoshâḥ, and whether they are to be found in no Sanskrit grammarian (p. 498);
16. Whether I was right in saying that Professor Whitney had complained about myself and others not noticing his attacks, and whether his remarks on my chapter on Fir, Oak, and Beech required being noticed (p. 500);
17. Whether I had invented the Epitheta ornantia applied by Professor Whitney to myself and other scholars, or whether they occur in his own writings (p. 504);
18. Whether E. Burnouf has written two or three bulky volumes on the Avesta, or only one (p. 515);
19. Whether Professor Whitney made a grammatical blunder in translating a passage of the Atharva-Veda Prâtiśâkhya, and on the strength of it charged the Hindu grammarian with holding opinions “obviously and grossly incorrect, and hardly worth quoting” (p. 519);
20. Whether Professor Whitney has occasionally been forgetful (p. 523).
Surely there are among Professor Whitney’s personal friends scholars who could say Yes or No to any of these twenty questions, and whose verdict would be accepted, and not by scholars only, as beyond suspicion. Anyhow, I can do no more for the sake of peace, and to put an end to the supposed state of chaos in the Science of Language, and I am willing to appear in person or by deputy before any such tribunal of competent judges.
I hope I have thus at last given Professor Whitney that satisfaction which he has claimed from me for so many years; and let me assure him that I part with him without any personal feeling of bitterness or hostility. I have grudged him no praise in former days, and whatever useful work we may receive from him in future, whether on the languages of India or of America, his books shall always receive at my hands the same justice as if they had been written by my best friend. I have never belonged to any company of collaborators, and never shall; but whosoever serves in the noble army for the conquest of truth, be he private or general, will always find in me a faithful friend, and, if need be, a fearless defender. I gladly conclude with the words of old Fairfax (Bulk and Selvedge, 1674): “I believe no man wishes with more earnestness than I do, that all men of learning and knowledge were men of kindness and sweetness, and that such as can outdo others would outlove them too; especially while self bewhispers us, that it stands us all in need to be forgiven as well as to forgive.”