538 Proceedings. 



E. 



Postscript to a Paper, by Dr. Haast, "On the Moa-bonc Cave at Sumner." (See 



pp. 528-530.) 



F. 

 To the Editor of the New Zealand Times. 



Wellington, 26th September, 1874. 



Sir, — In to-day's issue of your paper you print, in a prominent position, a postscript 

 to a paper recently read by Dr. Haast before the Canterbury Philosophical Institute on 

 the Moa-bone Cave at Sumner. This postscript is devoted almost entirely to my vilifi- 

 cation, on account of my having presumed to write a paper on a subject which Dr. Haast 

 seems to consider peculiarly his own. He charges me with dishonest conduct, and 

 includes Dr. Hector in the charge as my aider and abettor. 



I hope that, as this charge appears in your columns, you will give me an opportunity 

 of refuting it, not only as regards myself, but also the Director of the Geological Survey, 

 who is at present away from Wellington. 



Dr. Hector's comiection with the affair extends no further than that, as a personal 



favour, he read my paper on the Sumner Cave before the Philosophical Society— a favour 



which he is in the habit of extending to many more besides myself, as the minutes of the 

 society show. 



Dr. Haast will therefore, I hope, see fit to withdraw the last paragraph of his remark- 

 able paper, in which he charges Dr. Hector with being the wilful abettor of my alleged 

 dishonesty . 



With respect to Dr. Haast's somewhat ungentlemanly comments on myself, and his 

 assertion that I have dishonestly betrayed a trust reposed in me, I fail to see wherein 

 I merit the one or am guilty of the other. Dr. Haast says that the works were entirely 

 conducted under his own superintendence. This is scarcely true ; nevertheless, I will, 

 for the sake of argument, accept it as truth, and regard myself in the light of a mere 

 mullock-turning machine, examined and cleaned at stated intervals. 



These, then, being expressly the conditions under which I was employed, I cannot 

 see that Dr. Haast has any claim to any facts or theories I might observe or entertain on 

 matters which, by his own showing, were quite outside my especial duties. Dr. Haast 

 says that he explained to me the nature of every object discovered, and that he found me 

 incompetent to distinguish between the bones of a mammal and a bird. In answer to 

 this, 1 will only say that some months previous to the exploration of the Sumner Cave 

 1 was employed by Dr. Haast in searching for moa bones in Shag Valley, and, as bullock 

 bones are plentifully scattered about in that locality, I hope, for Dr. Haast's reputation, 

 that he has not sent to foreign museums, as moa bones, any of the collections which 

 I ^ en . m ad e for him. If I was incompetent to distinguish a mammal from a bird bone, 

 why did he employ me on this work ? I leave him to answer. 



I may say that I have myself known Dr. Haast to be in error in judging on points of 

 comparative anatomy ; but any anatomist is liable to error, and I do not wish to bring 

 before the public every triviality which occurs to my memory regarding him. My original 

 motive in writing my paper on the Sumner Cave was to give to the world the theoretical 

 bearings of the facts collected by me on his previously published theories respecting the 

 extinction of the moa by a race which he regarded as distinct from the Maoris. His 

 views on this subject are given in the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, 

 vol. IV., art. 4. If 1 filched notions from him at all, that published paper— and not, as 

 he says verbal instruction received from him— was the source of my information. 



lne kumner Cave explorations were made two years ago, since which Dr. Haast has 

 nacl plenty ot time to publish his views, and it is my belief' that but for the above paper 

 by me the public would not have had any communication from Dr. Haast for a long 

 time to come, as the facts coUected conflicted so strongly with his pet theories respecting 

 moas and moa-hunters. * r 



As to Dr. Haast's encouragement of my leaning to science, and the notes, consisting 

 of three or four pages m quarto," which, -after reading, he tore up as of no value to 



mm. 1 mav sav that Wnnn+ C l„ t ~„i_. . j__ -r^ tt° . *\. * ' 1 nn+pq 



is truly encouraging. ~ J ^""^ "™ u w ^ unvu " " A uuo 8 efforts 



rplJSL 1 ^* kboura hard to show what my antecedents were, but has shown nothing 

 SSS T ™ ^ T nee - d 1 be ashamed - ^ is true that while in Dr. Haast's employ- 



™™ r W ?fi Jf f g ? T m ?- ^^ions ; but I cannot see why, not having had the 

 2w t ?W^ §eS I educa * 1 ° i a which Dr - Haast seems to have enjoyed, I thould be 

 subject to bos sneers because I try to raise myself to a higher position in the intellectual 



him 1 may say that, fortunately, I only gave to Dr. Haast a copy of my origins 

 v, hich are contained m a notebook now in my possession. Such treatment of one' 



Begging excuse for trespassing 



am 



Alex. McKay. 



