31 



derfully explicit and convincingly reasonable that neither 

 bench nor bar failed to understand his explanation of such 

 difficult and obscure technical subjects. His marvelous 

 faculty of extemporaneous discussion of a scientific topic was 

 never more strikingly displayed than in the long lecture 

 which he gave as a witness in this case, and which was 

 listened to with such admiration that it has remained a tradi- 

 tion in the San Francisco courts. 



He threw into this as into all his work such earnestness 

 that no doubt of his sincerity could for a moment be enter- 

 tained, and the knowledge of the subject on which he was 

 ng testimony was so varied and profound, and his self- 

 Cession so supreme, that it was impossible in cross-exam- 

 ination to entangle him in his thoughts or his speech. 



His lame brought him other w r ork of the same description 



in the West, but he was then growing old and suffering from 



ily ailments, which made such fatigue as was involved in 



faithful mining work, on the surface and below ground, 



arduous. 



Another piece of expert work worthy of note was his 



>rt to the Corporators of the Hoosac Tunnel in October, 



1-71 Massachusetts, House Document No. 9, January, 1875). 



Trouble from caving had occurred in the tunnel, and he and 



other geologists were employed to report on the cause. The v 



found deep-seated rock decay at that portion o!' the western 



base of the range pierced by the tunnel, though glacial action 



had stri raniie -. - shell. This 



^illation fell in aptly with the study he had been making 



-itioii nt the rocks of the Appalachian chain 



in the Southern States, and gave him additional facts with 



which to support his argument. 



Hunt was also one of a conn \vhich Hon. C. 1 



cis Adams was chairman, which dratted a scheme tor a scien 



geological s - Massachusetts 



Document 266, April, 1 



,c only imp' Hunt did alter leavini- 



Canadian Survey was in ' 



