RENDU AND HIS EDITORS. 453 



devices with which I proposed to overcome them. That Prof. Forbes reached 

 the Mer de Glace in 1842, a few weeks before I went up the Glacier of the Aar, 

 only gave him the opportunity of making a few days' observations at a time 

 when I had already gained an annual average. That Prof. Forhes Jcnew in 1841 

 of my intention to make this experiment I can affirm the more positively as he 

 saw the iron, iars with which I intended to dore the holes, and which had been 

 carried up the glacier before he reached the Grimsel. That I was going to use 

 instruments of precision in these measurements he must have understood, since 

 I repeatedly mentioned my purpose of making a trigonometrical survey of the 

 glacier the following year. Whether I at any time mentioned the theodolite I 

 cannot remember now. But I am sure that he never suggested anything to me. 

 " Allow me one more remark. Everybody knows that I am a naturalist, 

 and not a physicist. My interest in the glaciers arose from a desire to learn 

 something of the mammoth of Siberia, after I had become convinced by Char- 

 pentier that the glaciers of Switzerland were much more extensive in earlier 

 times than now. It struck me that there might be some connection between 

 the burial of these gigantic mammalia in the arctic regions and the wider range 

 of glaciers in Switzerland ; I am one of those who believe, as you expressed it 

 in your short and characteristic speech at Geneva, that ' Nature is One,' and so 

 T was led to study the accumulations of ice without the necessary preparation. 

 This you cannot fail to perceive in reading the accounts of my successive at- 

 tempts, and for this, I hope, some allowance will hereafter be made." 



This account fairly tallies with the statement of Prof. Forbes in his 

 "Travels," quoted in his "Life" (p. 503) : 



" Far from being ready to admit, as my sanguine companions wished me to 

 do in 1841, that the theory of glaciers was complete, and the cause of their 

 motion certain, after patiently hearing all that they had to say, and reserving 

 my opinion, I drew the conclusion that no theory which I had then heard of 

 could account for the few facts admitted on all hands, and that the very structure 

 and motions of glaciers remained still to be deduced from observation." 



Incomparably greater than Forbes in his own field, the want of 

 physical knowledge, to which Agassiz refers at the conclusion of the 

 foregoing letter, rendered him, on this particular ground, a mere 

 child in comparison with his guest. Still, if the statement which I 

 have italicised in Agassiz's letter express a fact, then, while entertain- 

 ing no doubt that Prof. Forbes justified his conduct to his own mind, 

 I leave it to others to judge whether it would not be an evil day for 

 the frankness of scientific intercourse if such conduct should become 

 general. 



It is difficult at the present day and hour to convey an idea of the 

 stir caused by the communication of our joint paper to the Royal 

 Society by Mr. Huxley and myself; but many of us remember the 

 violent discharge of letters which followed that event. Had I in those 

 days a tendency to be puffed up, the circumstances were certainly 

 such as might exalt my self-importance. But, as a matter of fact, the 

 whole business was exceedingly saddening to me. For two years I 

 endeavored, while not flinching from what I held to be the duty of a 



