

A.] FORBES AND RENDU. 533 



quoted in Extract (c), page 12 of this Reply. But I regret to 

 state that he has given it in an incomplete shape, to the 

 manifest perversion of the meaning as respects the credit given 

 to Reudu. In the first place, the introductory sentence is 

 omitted. It is this: ' M. Rendu setms to have been more aware 

 of the importance of the determination of the rate of motion of 

 >an any other autlwr ; but the best information which he 

 could collect in 1841 did not much tend to clear up his doubts' 

 But the following omission is more serious ; for it suppresses half 

 a sentence, including the very point under discussion. Professor 

 Tyndall closes the quotation (see p. 12) with the words, '40 feet 

 per annum, or one-tenth of the last ! ' and he places four dots, 

 thus, . . . ., in lieu of the concluding words of the sentence, 

 which in my book are as follows: ' A DIFFERENCE WHICH HE 



ATTRIBUTES TO THE DIFFERENT RATES OF MOTION OF THE CENTRE 



SIDES ' (accompanied by a foot-note reference to the page of 



lu's Theoric). I cannot but look upon this suppression of 



the end of a quoted sentence, including the very point under 



discussion, as an evidence of strong prejudice in the writer, 



against which I feel myself called upon to protest. 



The idea that I had siqjpresscd Rendu's correct opinion, that 

 the centre of a glacier moves faster than the sides, and its cou- 

 nt analogy to the movement of a river, could have no 

 Ability to anyone who had before him the account of 

 lu's theory contained in my 'Travels/ and reprinted in this 

 s, for instance, in Extract (/), page 13. I there rc< all 

 (wh: act of stating my own opinions) that M. Rendu 'is 



illy writer of the Glacier school who has insisted upon the 

 of the ice, as shown by moulding itself to the endlessly 

 :;ig forms and sections of its bed ; and he is also opposed to 



tlttt lit* f 1he 



ice-si i /;/.s/fx/. 15ut M. liendu has the candour not to 



nious speculations as leading to any certain result, 

 not being founded on experiments worthy of confidence/ 



6. Value of the E ' /* Motion previous to 1842 



discussed. 



fessor Tyndall next proceeds (at p. 304) to discuss the 



: I was (,<] rect iii stating (Tr<n-< '-. j.. li'S) that 



progress of a ;_ as yet a new problem wlu-n I 



>:M-rvatinns on the M<-r dr (llacr in is JJ. ' He 



a tublr containing the earlier estimates from Kbel to Uciidu, 



and lie seems to challen^* their inaccuracy; but he 



; whether any oi> -\hich 



