Hayden Survey. For Cope's work I had always the greatest admiration 

 and I still regard him as one of the very ablest and most briUiant men I 

 have ever known, though my first introduction to him was anything 

 but encouraging. "The Triumvirate," as we were sarcastically called, 

 Osborn, Speir and myself, had learned of Cope at a time when the field 

 of our explorations was still under discussion and the place then most 

 favoured was Fort Wallace in western Kansas. As Cope had collected 

 there and published extensively of his finds, we thought it would be wise 

 to wait upon him for information. Accordingly, we called at his house 

 in Philadelphia and explained our plans, begging him to tell us where 

 to go. We could extract no information from him; he was polite and 

 pleasant enough, but absolutely noncommittal and he showed no 

 interest in our undertaking. When I asked him whether the country 

 around Fort Wallace was good collecting ground, he answered : "It was 

 before I went there" and declined to say whether it still was, or not. 



Such an attitude toward enthusiastic neophytes seems incredibly un- 

 scientific, not to say churlish, but it was chiefly due to the rivalry and 

 hatred that existed between Cope and Marsh, which extended to every- 

 thing that either one of them did. I cannot doubt that Cope refused to 

 give us any information because of the off-chance that we might be 

 emissaries of the foe. Not long after our return from the West, Osborn 

 and I became warm friends of Cope's and wholeheartedly espoused his 

 cause in the unending quarrel. It is a remarkable instance of this intense 

 rivalry, that Cope described and named new fossils by telegraphing 

 from the field to the Philosophical Society, so as to make sure of priority. 



Othniel Charles Marsh, a nephew of the philanthropist, George Pea- 

 body, was, from 1866 to his death in 1899, a professor at Yale. Like Cope, 

 he was a man of wealth, as wealth was measured in those days. I did not 

 meet him till 1881, when he called on me in Heidelberg, but I already 

 dishked him, because of what I knew of his little ways. Indeed, I came 

 nearer to hating him than any other human being that I have known 

 and his hostility to me had a really detrimental effect upon my career. 

 Like Charles Lamb, in the story which Woodrow Wilson was fond of 

 repeating, "you can't hate a fellow you know," but Marsh's egoism, his 

 extreme selfishness and unscrupulous duplicity aroused very strong 

 feeUngs in me. Our dear Dr. Guyot, one of the most gentle and kindly 

 of men, could not endure him and the elder Dana, the famous geologist, 

 though a colleague of Marsh's at Yale, cherished the strongest dislike 

 and disapprobation of him, as appears from many letters that he wrote 

 to me. 



C58] 



