6 



I now add testimonials from some of the persons to whom the papers 

 in question were sent, although I consider this part of the evidence as 

 quite immaterial, that which has gone before being sufficient as to the 

 date of publication. It is indeed not to be expected that persons will 

 generally remember the exact dates at which printed matter has been 

 received. Nevertheless in a few clays after making inquiry I received 

 the following : — 



" Professor O U. Marsh having stated in the " American Naturalist " (1873, p. 151), 

 that some of the above papers were not published at the dates which they bear, and that 

 " at least seven of them are antedated," I hereby state that most or all the above were, 

 received at my address <>r by me, at or near the dates printed on them, especially those 

 of the summer months." 



JAMES- ORTON, Prof, of Natural History in Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 



JAMES S. LIPPINOOTT, Corning, New York. 



E. T. COX, Stale Geologist, Indianapolis, Indiana. 



CHAS. M. WHEATLEY, Phcenixville, Pennsylvania. 



WM. C. KERR, Slate Geologist, Raleigh, North Carolina. 



JOSEPH SAVAGE, Lawrence, Kansas. 



GEORGE DAVIDSON, President of Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, Cal. 



JOHN H. J ANEW AY, M.D., Post Surgeon, Fort Hays, Kansas. 



I have also received letters from Principal Dawson of Montreal and 

 Professor Mudge of the State Agricultural College, Kansas, stating that 

 they received the papers, but did not keep exact account of the date of 

 reception. Among many others to whom they were sent, I may mention 

 Professors Seeley, Huxley, Gegenbauer, Peters, Hyrtl, Du Bocage and 

 others in Europe, and Messrs. Gotch and Rijgersma in Australia and the 

 West Indies respectively. 



I also add that they were received at my address at Fort Bridger, and 

 mostly forwarded by me promptly after the dates of distribution. 



The little that interests students in this matter is the dates of publica- 

 tion of the essays in question. The dates of reading are of secondary 

 importance and have been abandoned by naturalists generally as furnish- 

 ing basis for nomenclature, so that Prof. Marsh's able criticism of the 

 rlates on the cover of the American Philosophical Society's Proceedings 

 for 1872 may be regarded as purely antiquarian. The papers in question 

 were, in fact, issued independently of the society, and almost always in 

 advance of the time at which they were read before it.* 



The first descriptive notice of the new genus and species of Probos- 

 cidians w as published on August the 19th, and two other papers describing 

 the species and genera in more detail were published on the 20th and 22d 

 respectively. An account embracing the same facts was also read by 

 Prof. Winchell before the American Association for the Advancement of 



* But lest our bibliophile again charge me with fraud, let me here correct an error in the report 

 of the proceedings of that society for August, 1872, in "Nature" for 1873, p. 335. Here it is 

 stated that my first note on the Proboscidians was read on August 16th - T I hasten to say that 

 this is an error probably derived from the wording of the note as published on August 19th, in. 

 which it was stated (without my knowledge) that "The Secretary announced that he had re- 

 ceived from Prof. Cope," etc. This could only have referred to the last meeting preceding, 

 (on the 16th) ; hut r in fact , it was not read until the meeting- following (September 20th). 



