1841-42-] CONTROVERSY WITH 7 D. FORBES. 199 



he calls to his help Studer, who was always only too 

 ready to join in a crusade against intruders on his 

 geological preserve of the Bernese Oberland. Forbes 

 seems rather anxious not to appear to have studied " in 

 the school of Agassiz " ; but to show that the fact of 

 the structure of the ice described in his notice was 

 unknown to Agassiz, de Charpentier, and other writers. 

 His remarks about " studying in a school ' are childish 

 in the extreme, and his knowledge of other works on 

 the structure of the ice was certainly limited ; for Hugi, 

 Rendu, and before them David Brewster of Edinburgh, 

 had observed the veined structure. 



Agassiz's answer, dated the 2Qth of March, 1842, 

 gives the whole story of the relations between him and 

 Forbes. There is no doubt that Agassiz and every one 

 who met Forbes under the auspices of Agassiz, both 

 at the "Hotel des Neuchatelois " and at Neuchatel, 

 did everything possible to help Forbes, and were ex- 

 tremely kind and courteous to him ; while, on his part, 

 Forbes was austere to an extent seldom seen, even 

 among Englishmen. The impression he made when in 

 Switzerland was decidedly unfavourable, except in the 

 case of a single person, Professor Bernard Studer, to 

 whom he afterward dedicated his book, " Travels through 

 the Alps of Savoy," etc., 1843. It was wrong on his 

 part to accept the hospitality of Agassiz, and then to 

 act as if he had met him in a hotel. He was con- 

 stantly on his guard not to show any mark of assent, or 

 to say anything which might be useful for future observa- 

 tions. His great reserve puzzled everybody ; and when 

 he left, there was a general feeling of relief. Through- 



