278 Scientific Intelligence. 
II. GEOLOGY. 
1. Reply to Mr. Marcow’s strictures on Mr. F. B. Meek in his Notes 
on the Cretaceous and Carboniferous Rocks of Texas, (in a letter to the 
Editors.) —GenTLEMEN :—I had intended never to answer any of Mr. Mar- 
reiterating opinions already expressed, after all the facts in possession of 
the parties have been published, can neither advance the interests of sci- 
ence, nor prove very interesting to scientific readers. In a paper recently 
published by Mr. Marcou, however, he makes some statements of a per- 
sonal nature, which my friends think, if allowed to pass unnoticed, may 
~ place me ina false position. 
The paper to which I allude is entitled, “ Notes on the Cretaceous and 
Carboniferous rocks of Texas, by Jules Marcou,”—and was published in 
the VIIIth volume of the Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural 
History. It is intended as a critical review of a paper by Dr. B. F. Shumard, 
containing a section of the Texas formations; and the personal remarks 
to which my attention has been called, are made incidentally in connec- 
tion with this review. 
The first of these remarks worthy of notice, (and it is of no very great 
importance,) occurs on page 94, where he mentions an error on one of 
the plates of the VIIth volume of the Pacific Railroad Reports, in copying 
a figure from a paper of his in the Bulletin of the Geological Society of 
France, citing it as an instance of the careless work of “Messrs. Hall, 
Blake and Meek.” : 
Now the fact is, the figures referred to by Mr. Marcon, were not copied 
b , as I have already explained to him by letter, The other figures 
on the same plate were drawn by me from specimens left by Mr. Blake at 
| , N. Y., where I was then living. Each of my drawings was 00 
nm 
and expressing saliddaction with the explanation in regard the plas 
ittle surprised that he should now connect my name with It} 
though it is possible the nature of our correspondence on the subject — 
have escaped his memory. re 
On page 96 of his Boston paper already alluded to, Mr. Marcou, pers 
speaking of the so-called Gryphea Tucumcarii, says, “ On looking 9 
