Papers relating to the Fusion of Carbon. 1d 
— to give offence to our former correspondent, at the same 
pe ame that they are unnecessary to the scientific discussion of the 
ject 
Committee object, in the first place, to the word Seciesd 
neously,” as introduced into the title of the paper. 2 
The title was “Remarks respecting Mr. Vanuxem’s memoir on 
fed pre product, er erroneously identified with the fused caren of Salama 
The committee admit that my paper ice Se to prove that the sub- 
stance examined by Mr. Vanuxem was not the same as that 
and described by Professor Silliman.” It follows Eapvany “that it was un- 
truly treated as the same; either through error or design;—I have 
sincerely said ie was pearehs error. Would the acon ecanadiins prefer the 
only other alternative 
rs to have been iron; and the author appears to have re- 
ceived, and evidently intends. to convey the i igiaber ob that 
the eubstances considered as fused or volatilized carbon by Pro- 
feet Silliman, must have been similarly constituted.’” If the 
Committee es the force of language, this passage con- 
tains a very direct insinuation, that Professor Vanuxem may 
have wished to convey an impression ne he had. not re- 
ceived, — NEUE ALA 
I am astonished, that words, so innocent in in their import, and so well 
intended, should be construed into an insinuation ae to my thoughts. 
* Thirdly—The Committee object to the passage which ac- 
cuses Professor Vanuxem.of having. given ‘ a broad and un- 
reserved, though indirect contradiction to Professor Suliman’s 
representations.’ The Committee do not perceive in the pa 
of Mr Vanuzem, any contradiction to the representations of 
. Silliman.’ 
uxem makes statements, ke vances opinions, irre- 
was beca mer 
final influence on the reader suspended, by any expression of doubt of 
his own premises or conclusions, nor ef any deference for those which 
he controverted. 
