

Prof. Hitchcock's Rejoinder to Dr. Deane. 391 



I now understand this gentleman to claim, not only the ori- 

 ginal discovery of these footmarks, which in a popular sense I 

 awarded to him, but their first scientific investigation ; that his 

 " three (first) letters, written without a ray of knowledge other 

 than was derived from philosophical inductions, contain the fun- 

 damental principles and doctrines applied to the science of these 



■ 



organic remains;" that in my Final Report on Massachusetts, I 

 was "compelled by controlling necessity, to adopt facts, opinions 

 and arguments, which were emphatically expressed to me ere 

 my scepticism had been dispelled ;" and that it was only an 

 "implicit confidence" in my readiness to render him "impartial 

 justice," that led him to yield to me the liberty to record the 

 history of the footmarks. If this is indeed a correct view of the 

 case, then I am far more culpable and dishonorable than Dr. 

 Deane represents me ; though his charges of injustice are very 

 severe. But let us look for a moment at the facts. 



Early in the spring of 1835, (not 1834, as Dr. Deane says is 

 stated in my Report, of which unfortunately I have no copy, 

 having returned the proof,) a cloven specimen of sandstone, con- 

 taining peculiar impressions, was brought to Greenfield, through 

 the agency of Mr. Wilson,* and laid by the roadside in the street* 

 Dr. Deane, whom I had known as a respectable young physi- 

 cian, with a predilection for scientific pursuits, sent me an ac- 

 count of them ; declaring his unhesitating belief that the im- 

 pressions were " the tracks of a turkey," stating at the same time 

 that he was " no geologist," and presuming that these appear- 

 ances, though new to him, were not so to me ; and expressing a 

 willingness to have them preserved for me if I desired it. What 

 now would be the conclusion of a geologist from such a letter : 

 a geologist who had sometimes been led away by respectable 

 men long distances in vain, to see supposed tracks on stone ? 

 From the known scientific taste of such a man, he would, in- 

 deed, hope that the impressions were something more than dilu- 

 vial furrows, or veins of segregation ; but he would see at once 

 that Dr. Deane was unacquainted with the history of organic re- 



* How unfortunate have I been in my efforts to avoid intimating that Dr. Deane 

 derived his opinions from Mr. Wilson ! In consequence of a letter received from 

 him just before my Report went to press, in which he manifested much sensibility 

 on this point, I added those explanations in which he now sees only "a taunt to 

 an associate. " But jealousy is argus-eyed. 



