TRANSACTIONS OF THE SECTIONS. $ 



that Mr. Nasmyth's abstract had passed through the press, and as he had 

 certainly not meant to have sanctioned the delivery of any private copies 

 before the publication of the volume ; that Mr. Nasmyth, however, could 

 not be regarded as at all responsible for these irregularities ; that full con- 

 fidence had always been placed in the communications from authors, and 

 that no such question had ever occurred before ; and that unless Mr. Owen 

 should take the formal step of an appeal to the Council, in which case it 

 would become his (Mr. Phillips's) duty to await the directions he should 

 receive from that body, he could neither suppress nor suspend the pub- 

 lication. 



On the S^th of June Mr. Phillips addressed the following letter to Mr. 

 Nasmyth : — 



« SiR^ " York, June 24, 1840. 



" I have this moment received from Mr. R. Taylor, for the first time, a 

 proof of the abstract of your memoirs on Odontology, and am concerned to 

 find that you have made additioiis* to it since I forwarded the MS. to be set 

 up. This is grievous ; but what astonishes me more, is to learn that, without 

 my knowledge, you have received copies of the paper in this unauthentic 

 state, and communicated extracts, or the whole, to a Medical Review. 



" These unfortunate circumstances place me in a painful position ; but their 

 effect is more to be regretted on your account, since they deprive me alto- 

 gether of the power of substantiating the authenticity of your communi- 

 cations. " Yours very truly, 



" Alexander Nasmyth, Esq." " John Phillips." 



To this letter Mr. Nasmyth replied as follows : — 



" To Professor Phillips. 



" 13 A, George Street, Hanover Square, 

 tf Sir, J™e 27, 1840. 



« It is with feelings of no little astonishment that I perused your letter of 

 June 24th, received yesterday ; and I am quite at a loss to divine in what 

 way I have deviated with respect to the publication of my abstract in the 

 Transactions from the ordinary course of proceeding. More than six weeks 

 ago, a proof of my paper was transmitted to me, and I was never more sur- 

 prised than on learning that you did not receive one before June 24th. I 

 corrected my proof, and received a revise of it, which I duly returned ; and 

 of course had every right to presume that either the proof or revise was sub- 

 mitted to the Editor of the publication to which I was contributing. With 

 respect to the corrections made, I at once undertake to prove that they con- 

 sisted in no interpolation whatever of new matter, but merely in alterations, 

 rendering the abstract a more faithful digest of my papers as reported in the 

 Literary Gazette and Athenaeum, and am therefore still more unable to un- 

 derstand the propriety of this interference with my clear right to do justice 

 to my papers in their authentic report. As to the printing separate copies 

 of my abstract, as I have had several letters from you, authorising me to 

 give publicity to it in any way I choose, I cannot suppose I was doing wrong 

 in making use of a permission freely granted. 



" I remain, Sir, your obedient servant, 



" A. J. Nasmyth." 



* The words in Italics in this and the subsequent letters, and in the reports to the Council, 

 were underlined in the originals. 



b2 



