184 Of the Structure'of the Earth. 
jects, which Mr. Michell may have left behind him; .but unfor= 
tunately for the science, his Son-in-law Sir Thomas Turton, Bart. 
has stated, that none such can be found :—The Rev. Gentleman 
at Cambridge, who enjoys Dr.Woodward’s salary for promoting 
Geological knowledge, has not (like the worthy Baronet men- 
tioned above) satisfied my inquiry, whether any papers relating 
to the order, thicknesses, &c. of the British Strata, were left by 
Mr. Michell in the Woodwardian Museum, at the time when 
e surrendered the charge of the same to a successor, many 
years ago: but I still hope, and so do many others, that the 
Reverend Gentleman will condescend to do so, : 
My object therefore now is, to request the favour of you, to 
reprint Mr, Michell’s paper in your Magazine, and allow me to 
place at the foot of some of its pages, a few explanatory Notes, 
in the general confirmatory, from my own experience in widely 
aud minutely exploring the British Strata, of the extraor- 
dinary correctness of his views of the leading Geological facts of 
our island, considering the period at which he wrote, when and 
for long after which, scarcely anything which is now found to be 
really valuable, as to the Earth’s structure, was put forth to the 
public. 
Here I cannot refrain from again adverting to the work of a 
late Oxford Professor, whose conduct towards my friend Mr.- 
Smith*, I have already censured, (although but in a small degree, 
come- 
* The Gentleman alluded to in p. 173 of your last volume, as having called 
on Mr. Smith in November last, has since avowed himself to a common friend 
of Mr. Smith and myself, as the Author of the art'cle in the Ediaburgh Review, 
which is mentioned above: he took at the time a few desultory notes, of what 
Mr. Smith could state from memory, as to the dates and exient of h’s labours 
and discoveries, but he positively declined then to tell Mr. S. ¢» whai particular 
purpose, he was making such application io him ; and he evaded the attending of 
a select meeting of Mr. Smith’s friends, when such a Statement as that he had 
requested, was to-be prepared and settled, after due deliberation: and when I 
pressed him at Sir Joseph Banks's meeting, to mention his amended use of the 
particulars which Mr, Smith kad, at his instance, requested of me to assist in 
drawing up, he declined a direct answer, but insinuated, that it was fo defending 
Dr. K-di, his very particular Friend, from aspersions that had been cast on him, 
regarding Mr. Smith! I gavea firm, and I trust suitable answer. which may 
perhaps at some time appear m your pages, and the matter dropped. 
The above particulars may somewhat account, why, throughout the Critique 
i question, Docror Kipp is so ostensibly brought forwards. and as it were 
pitted against o or Mr. Smiru3 why so many of the quotations, and references ta 
Authors, are artfully made to bear (many of them most unfairly, as I shall per- 
haps state, when leisure permits) against Mr. Smith’s claims, to almost any ori- 
Ginality or merit; butthe two last paragraphs explain the whole, and show, al- 
thourh less openly than Dr. K went about it, that the object in view has been 
(as Mr. Smith from the first suspected) to push into notice, those * men of Lite. 
rality and scientific acquirements,” and their Works, who are, as the Reviewer 
tells us, engaged in * correcting the investigations” of “an Englishman, untaught 
aud unassisted,” (see your vol. xlv. p. 296 Note): the Reviewer with grea tcom- 
p'acency concludes, by complimenting the persons of ** jntelligence and dbterality** 
alluded 
