THE CARDIFF GIANT -1869 -1870 481 



That the whole thing had been confessed a swindle by 

 all who took part in it, with full details as to its origin and 

 development, seemed to him not worthy of the slightest 

 mention. Regardless of all the facts in the case, he 

 showed a pathetic devotion to his theory, and allowed 

 his imagination the fullest play. He found, first of all, 

 an inscription of thirteen letters, &quot; introduced by a large 

 cross or star the Assyrian index of the Deity.&quot; Before 

 the last word of the inscription he found carved &quot;a 

 flower which he regarded as consecrated to the particular 

 deity Tammuz, and at both ends of the inscription a ser 

 pent monogram and symbol of Baal.&quot; 



This inscription he assumed as an evident fact, though 

 no other human being had ever been able to see it. Even 

 Professor White, M.D,., of the Yale Medical School, with 

 the best intentions in the world, was unable to find it. 

 Dr. White was certainly not inclined to superficiality or 

 skepticism. With &quot;achromatic glasses which magnified 

 forty-five diameters 7 he examined the &quot;pinholes&quot; which 

 covered the figure, and declared that &quot;the beautiful finish 

 of every pore or pinhole appeared to me strongly opposed 

 to the idea that the statue was of modern workmanship. 

 He also thought he saw the markings which Mr. McWhor- 

 ter conjectured might be an inscription, and said in a 

 letter, &quot;though I saw no recent tool-marks, I saw evi 

 dences of design in the form and arrangement of the 

 markings, which suggested the idea of an inscription.&quot; 

 And, finally, having made these concessions, he ends his 

 long letter with the very guarded statement that, i l though 

 not fully decided, I incline to the opinion that the Onon- 

 daga statue is of ancient origin. 1 



But this mild statement did not daunt Mr. McWhorter. 

 Having calmly pronounced Dr. White in error, he pro 

 ceeded with sublime disregard of every other human be 

 ing. He found that the statue &quot;belongs to the winged 

 or l cherubim type ; that down the left side of the fig 

 ure are seen the outlines of folded wings even the sepa- 



1 The italics are as in the original. 

 II. 31 



