To Readers and Correspondents. 143 



" To the Editor of (he Nalional Gazelle. 



"Sir — When a matter has been referred for adjustment to impartial arbitrators, ibe ap 

 pearance of exparte anonymous statements is evidence at once of wealiness and unfair 

 ness. 



" Such is the character of the communication signed X., in your paper of Tuesday, the- 

 24th. Neither was your Gazette deemed of suflicient importance to attain the secret ob- 

 ject of the writer; a literal copy of it having been lodged at the same time with a re- 

 spectable morning paper, into whose colunmsit thus surreptitiously got the next day. 



"It is not the intention of the writer of this note to repeal at this tijne the particular his- 

 tory of the transaction which has produced this anonymous attack, the nature of which 

 is perfectly understood by those whom it concerns. That liistory is to be found in the 

 United States Gazetto of this morning. Tiie writer will content himself with staling, that 

 the matter upon which the difference of opinion has arisen was referred on Friday, the 

 20th, to a committee of three members of the American Philosophical Society, supposed 

 to be entirely unprejudiced, by a majuriiy of the members present. If any one of them 

 was not so, ho will not be able to conctal the fact that lie was Covertly placed on that 

 committee for the purpose of perpetuating error. Unimfxirlant as the matter may appear, 

 the interests of natural science and of truth are involved in it; and imhvidiials who 

 clearly show they are not friends to impartial investigation, must suppose their conduct 

 will be vigilantly attended to. 



"It has been usually attributed to tlio.se wlio cherish the love of natural history, tlmt 

 their truest reward is that certain elevation of mind they receive hi the cullivalion of 

 their pursuit. A true naturalist loves only lo be taught by nature, and disdains to tear U 

 by other means. It is the em[)irical jirelendcr alone who is your anonymous oracle. 



" As to the statements of X., they arc all \\ ide li-om llie truth. He is afraid of the de- 

 cision of the committee, and, therefore, ' willi Irumpels and with shawms," he is 'trium- 

 phantly sustaining and vindicating brilliant discoveries,' the fame ol' which, it is predicted, 

 will never extend beyond the columns of a newspaper." " F." 



Dr. Hays, however, it appears, was determined to force himself info notice, and to re- 

 move all doubts as to who wrote the article signed X., he procured the followmg state- 

 ment to be published in the July numljerof the Journal of llie Iranklin Institute. 



" Dr. Hays rose, and after some prefiitory remarks, slated in substance as follows. 

 That an attack upon the scientific reputation of Dr. Godman, late Professor of Nattiral 

 History in the Institute, having been made very recendy by a lecturer on geology, in a 

 public lecture delivered in the hall of the Institute, at which many members of the so- 

 ciety were present ; and that a thorough investigation of the subject having resulted in 

 a complete refutation of the attack, he thought it would be interestuig to the members 

 of the Institute to be put in possession of llie facts upon which Uie vindication of their 

 late Professor rested. 



" The lecturer before alluded to, had stated to his class, that the animal described by 

 Dr. Godman as new, under the name of Telracaulodon Mastodnntoideum, was nothing 

 more than the young of the common mastodon. In support of this, the lecturer had ex- 

 hibited two lovrer jaw bones from the collection of the American Philosophical Society, 

 one of which he stated to be that of a young animal, and showed the socket which had 

 once contained the tooth characteristic of the animal described by Dr. Godmsui, while 

 the other, whicb he said was that of an adult, was asserted by him to have contained no 

 such socket- The lecturer had also exhibited a tusk which he said was the milk tusk of 

 the young of the gigantic mastodon. 



" Doctor Hays proceeded to say, that the jaw exhibited by the lecturer as that of a 

 young animal, had proved, on examination, to be that of an adult, as the dentition clearly 

 showed ; while in that admitted by the lecturer to be the jaw of an old animal, the re- 

 mains of the socket which had once contained a tusk, was clearly to be seen. And fur- 

 ther, that the tusk exhibited by the lecturer as a milk tusk, was evidently that of an old 

 animal. 



" Dr. H. stated that he had communicated to the American Philosophical Society, the 

 proofs of the accuracy of the preceding statement. 



" A. D. Bache, Chairman. 



"J. Henry Bulkley, Rec. Sec." 



This statement, which is malignantly intended to injure the editor with the friends of 

 Dr. Godman, and with the public, is a mass of inconsistency and falsehood. 



First. It has been shown that the scientific reputation of Dr. Godman never was at- 

 tacked. 



Second. That there had been no refutation of an attack, but that an vmequivocal assent 

 had been extorted from Dr. Hays, by the specimens which the lecturer in geology had 

 used. 



Third. That the lecturer never had asserted one of the jaws to have been that of a 

 young animal with a sockcl, and the other, that of au old animal without a socket ; but 



