APPENDIX. 0i^ 



wards I showed the specimen to Mr. Charlesworth, and upon a first in- 

 spection, he assured me it was a genuine fossil, from the circumstance of 

 its agreement in colour and general appearance with the supposed opos- 

 sum's tooth which he had previously examined in Mr. Colchester's cahinet ; 

 and shortly afterwards I was confirmed in the correctness of this opinion, 

 hy his pointing out to me in what it diflfered from the recent jaw of a 

 Macaque which he had at his apartments in Great Russell Street ; this led 

 me to determine to publish Mr. Colchester's fossil in the succeeding num- 

 ber of the Magazine of Natural History, but as I did not feel at home 

 upon the subject of comparative osteology, Mr. Charlesworth undertook to 

 furnish an osteological description, to accompany my letter, stating in what 

 particulars he believed the Kyson fragment to differ from the corresponding 

 part in the existing Macaci. It was, of course, my intention to mention 

 in my letter, the obligation I was under to you, for having told me the 

 genus to which the fragment belonged, but I cannot admit that any right 

 of describing it was vested in you as a consequence of that determination ; 

 still, had I known that you entertained the least wish to describe the fossil, 

 I would willingly have left it in your hands at the time I first showed it 

 you. I think you must be in error, when you say that Mr. Charlesworth 

 now denies his intention of describing the jaw ; because, under the circum- 

 stances I have mentioned, he had my full permission to do so, and the 

 illustrations were executed for his own description. I am aware, however, 

 that Mr. Charlesworth does deny any intention of claiming, as his own, 

 the original determination of its quadrumanous character, and this impu- 

 tation I suppose to have originated in some misapprehension. 



I remain, my dear Sir, 



Your's truly, 



SEARLES V, WOOD. 



Richd. Owen, Esq. 



No. 48. 



6, Park Cottages, Regent's Park, 

 Dec. 7, 

 My dear Sir, 



I beg to thank you for your prompt and obliging answer to 

 my note of the 5th December, and to request that I may add it to the 

 correspondence which Mr. Charlesworth seems determined to publish in 

 his Magazine. I was not aware, until I received your letter, that you had 

 mistaken me so far as to suppose that I thought your fossil belonged to a 

 recent species. I alluded, at the time of my first comparison, to the pos- 

 sibility of such being the case, because we had not, in England, the jaws of 

 every known existing 3/acact«, wherewith to compareit; and to impress upon 

 you the necessity of obtaining the most decisive evidence of its disinter- 

 ment from the Eocene stratum, in which it had been stated to you to be 

 found. In pointing out to you the resemblance of the fossil to the Maca- 

 tus radiatus, I wished merely to demonstrate its generic relationship, ad- 

 verting, at the same time, not only to the difference in size, but in shape. 



Permit me to add, in reference to the following passage in a letter 

 from Mr. Charlesworth to Mr. Lyell, " This new charge implicates Mr. 

 Wood, for Mr. Charlesworth could not have claimed the determination 

 of the quadrumanous fragment as his own, without that gentleman con- 

 niving at, and becoming a party to, the fraud : " that I thoroughly repu- 



