space and time permitted, here annex a table of the daily maximum and 

 minimum oceanic temperatures between the entrance of the squadron 

 upon the Paumotu group and its arrival at Tahiti, in support of the views 

 advanced in my article, hut it is better perhaps to defer it for the present, 

 as the Association will meet so shortly. 



On p. 135, to which, with a view to save time, I refer the reader, Mr. D. 

 specifies what he is pleased to call a very apparent instance of equivoca- 

 tion, a (for me) most unfortunate change in the idea — and adds, "We 

 may reasonably hesitate before we give full credit to the statements of one 

 who will so prove false to his own writings." 



Now I assert in regard to this, that the equivocation is entirely Mr. D.'s, 

 and utterly deny that I have in any instance proved false to my own wri- 

 tings, or falsified my opponent's. It were well for him could he with equal 

 truth say as much. Where I remark, in my vindication, p. 385, "where 

 that exists is ' the field of their most lavish display,' " I refer to the tem- 

 perature of the bottom. This is expressly stated in an antecedent sen- 

 tence on the same page, 385, and immediately following, is the very pas- 

 sage quoted by Mr. D., from the Boston Journal, " among the Paumotus, 

 the field of their most lavish display, the temperature varies from 77° to 

 83°," and to this is appended a foot-note expressly declaring these temper- 

 atures to be those of the surface ! I ask the readers of this Journal to 

 reperuse this passage in my vindication, and decide whether my language 

 has not been pitifully distorted, to fasten on me this charge of equivoca- 

 tion. But this is far from the most glaring instance of Mr. D.'s shameful 

 perversion of my expressions. I will pass over, for the present, the cool 

 manner in which he meets my charge of having accused me of making 

 before the Association statements borrowed from his MSS., by merely say- 

 ing that he was led into error, but this matters little with the points at 

 issue — merely remarking that it is a very easy mode of avoiding the ac- 

 knowledgment that he has been guilty of making a deliberate statement 

 on hearsay, every word of which is untrue. I proceed to notice another 

 instance of his honorable method of using the language of an opponent. 

 With the view of casting farther doubts on my assertions, he says, pp. 135, 

 136, " I might dwell upon the admission by Mr. C, that the fact of the 

 absence of corals from the Gallapagos, was not verified by him till the 

 sheets of his article in the Boston Journal were going through the press. 

 This fact was fully stated in my report, the reading of which has been so 

 singularly forgotten, and the whole explained at some length ; yet he only 

 verified it when, long afterwards, his paper was in the press." This is 

 his statement. Now for my language, on which it is based, or, more cor- 

 rectly, not based. 



By turning to p. 382, of last volume, it will be seen, that I declare my 

 knowledge of the absence of corals at the Gallapagos was derived from the 

 commander and surgeon of the vessel in which I took passage from Syd- 

 ney to Tahiti in the spring of 1840, — that not satisfied with the explana- 

 tions of it given by the captain, I "was led to suspect that it would be 

 found owing to the low temperature of the ocean," and that " this suspi- 

 cion," (not the fact of the absence of corals there,) " however, I only ver- 

 ified while the sheets of my article were passing through the press." The 

 fact of the absence of corals at the Gallapagos, I have never yet verified, 

 excepting by the testimony of some whalemen whom I met at Tahiti, and 

 I never considered that any other verification was necessary. 



