206 BOTANICAL GAZETTE (marca 
forth in the first part of the paper reviewed. Not until my investigation was 
well under way and I had asked for and had received a second shipment of 
cabbages from Racine did I know that samples had also been sent toDr 
Russell, and that he had again undertaken to find out the cause of the d& 
ease. At no time have I visited his laboratory or seen any of his cultures 
any of his experiments, or had any desire to know what he was doing. In 
November 1896, Dr. Russell visited my laboratory desiring, as he said, “® 
talk shop,” or, in other words, to learn what I was doing. Some of his que 
tions I answered, others I parried, as any other man would have done, a0 
desiring to give away to another working in the same lines information rea 
ing to an unfinished piece of research. At that time he said he had secured 
no infections and was unable to get the organism to grow in beef broth. He 
obtained from me a few facts which probably were of use to him, namely, 
that I was still working on the disease, that my organism was yellow, and 
that it would grow in properly made beef broth. From him I received the 
Statement that the organism which he was then studying was yellow, the 
other statements which I have given above, and the fact that the loss at 
Racine exceeded $75,000. I obtained from him no facts which in ed a 
changed my plan of work, and no ideas which were of any value to me excep 
the statement as to the approximate pecuniary loss at Racine, which state 
ment I carefully refrained from using, depending rather on Sager” 
ments furnished by cabbage growers, If Dr. Russell had any ere mm 
time as to the mode of infection or other interesting peculiarities 
organism, they were not revealed to me. later 
This is all I knew definitely of Dr. Russell’s work until ten ae q 
(September 1897) after the publication of two-thirds of my bg gee o tat 1 
a week of the appearance of the remaining part. He then weer : 
he had also secured infections and was preparing a nee te for A ad a 
He volunteered, however, scarcely any information concerning acinar” : 
his work, and no information whatever of which I have made any P 
did I ask for any, nor desire any. “4 cfelit : 
Such are the sole grounds for the charge of omission to give wee Dr 
work already done, and of being “fully cognizant” of unpublished $07 secs 
Russell, as I learned from a conversation with him in sept oT 
to have gone away from Washington with the idea that I would eS 
the germ, but I did not designedly or intentionally give him any 
sion, . in if 
It has always been my desire to give all work the fullest recoga™ bet 
any one has cause to accuse me of sins of omission, it is not ro reading é a 
Professor Garman, who published a paper three years Laer 309-3") a 
Dr. Russell’s Springfield paper (Agricultural Science, July wie far, is# 
on a bacterial disease of cabbage, and which, if it did not Lae ie gpd 8 
least cautious, covers much the same ground as Dr. Russell's 08" 
