304 DAVENPORT ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES. 



From Mr. B. Pickman Mann, Editor oJ "■Psyche." 



Washington, D. C, .March 30, 1885. 

 Mr. C. E. Pltna.m, Davefiport, Io7va, — 



Dear Sir: I have this day received and read with care your jjam- 

 phlet on "Elephant Pipes in the Museum of the Academy of Natural 

 Sciences, Davenport, Iowa." I commend the judicious tone of the 

 criticism, and give full credence to your version of the discoveries, 

 relying upon the intrinsic force of the argument and my faith in your 

 character and that of your associates. Respectfully, 



B. Pickman Mann. 



From Rev. J. P. MacLea.N, Ajithor of "Mastodon, Mnmfnoth, and Man," ''The 

 Mound-Builders,'''' etc. 



[Tiiis ilislinj^iiishjJ ;ircha;olog-ist, ;i few weeks since, visited our city, and delivered a lecture 

 upon "The Mound-builders" for the benefit of the Academy. In concluding: his lecture. Prof. 

 MacLean made reference to the fact that an obscure individual by the name of Henshaw, who 

 is in the employ of the Bureau of Ethnolog^y, at Washing^ton, had recently published a paper 

 questioning^ the genuineness of the elephant pipes in the museum of the Davenport Academy, 

 and makintr a gross and unjustifiable attack upon the good faith of the Academv and the integ- 

 rity of its members, lie stated that this man Henshaw was no archaeologist, that his opinions 

 had no scientific value, and that he himself had made a careful examination of the pipes, was 

 familiar with their history, and that, in his opinion, they were undoubtedly authentic, and must 

 be accepted as genuine mound relics.] 



Hamilton, Ohkj, June 15, 1885. 

 Charles E. Putnam, Esq., — 



Dear Sir: I have very carefully read your "Vindication of the 

 Elephant Pipes." You have faithfully and thoroughly performed the 

 work. I think no reasonable man will fail to be convinced. Person- 

 ally. I never doubted the genuineness of these interesting and impor- 

 tant relics. The first intimation that I ever had that their authenticity 

 was questioned came in the article from Mr. Henshaw in the "Second 

 Report of the P>ureau of Ethnology." 



I had supposed that the names of all American archaeologists and 

 ethnologists were familiar to me, but the name of Henshaw is entirely 

 new. In fact, Major Powell was forced to e.xplain to his readers that 

 this man was a "skilled ornithologist." It matters not who he is, still 

 his article is no credit to either himself or the Bureau that employs 

 him. I think the American ethnologists are to be congratulated that 

 not one of their number could be engaged to perform such odious 

 work. The covert assault on Mr. Gass is unmanly, and one in which 

 no true scientific man would engage. 



It seems to me that the Bureau of Ethnology has overstepped its 

 legitimate boundary in the publication of Henshaw's article. If it 

 must engage in "criticisms" on finds which have been made, then let 

 the criticism be o])en and manly, and from writers who have made 

 some reputation in archaeological research. 



To some your strictures may seem severe, but, after considering the 

 matter carefully, I think you have been no more than just under the 

 circumstances. You certainly have literally annihilated Henshaw, and 

 it is to be ho])ed that he will at once retire into that obscurity from 

 which Major Powell has dragged him forth, and that his like may never 

 again be seen in the land. Yours resi)ectfully, 



J. P. MacLean. 



