304 The American Naturalist. [March, 
made from the actual specimens, and that the missing parts are shaded 
in. A very great calamity is, that the specimens are often not drawn 
as they really appear in nature, but that they are drawn restored, 
These restorations are made according to the order of the Professor, 
If it now happens that the restoration should prove to be incorrect, 
the plate becomes worthless and has no scientific value. 
Dr. O. Meyer has stated that Prof. Marsh has antedated his volume 
on the Dinocerata intentionally. This is also true; and everything 
that has been said by him about this point is correct. The review of 
this work was written by Prof. Marsh himself, and he asked the signa- 
tures of Mr. Harger and Dr. Williston for it without success, and had 
to accept instead the initials of the lady type-writer, 
7- There is one insinuation made in the article of Dr. Meyer on 
which I have to say a few words® It refers, if I understand rightly, to 
the type specimen of Zriglyphus which has disappeared from the Mu- 
seum at Stuttgart. Dr. Meyer has asked Prof. Marsh to state how he 
came in to possession of a tooth from a “‘ Jurassic ” (Triassic) mammal 
from Germany, of which Prof. Marsh told Dr. Meyer. Prof. Marsh 
has not answered Dr. Meyer’s article. In justice to Prof. Marsh, I 
state that the tooth in the possession of Prof. O. C. Marsh was pur- 
chased from a dealer of Stuttgart, in 1865, and that it is not the type of 
Trighphus which disappeared from the Stuttgart Museum. All the posi- 
tive statements of Dr. Meyer’s article I consider to be true. 
8. Prof. Cope thinks ‘‘that an investigation as to who has delivered 
Prof. Marsh’s lectures in Yale College during past years will yield some 
interesting results.’’ To this I have to say, that such an investigation 
is not necessary ; Prof. Marsh does not lecture at Vale at all. 
9. Prof. W. B. Scott, of Princeton, has published in the Herald of 
January 22d, a letter written by him to Prof. Marsh. What Prof. Scott 
has said there I fully sustain. He says: ‘‘I feel constrained to sa 
that I disapprove of your work, your methods and your administration 
of the office which you hold. This disapproval does not rest on what 
I have heard from others, nor upon any personal considerations, but 
upon my own experience and my studies in the field to which both you 
and I are devoted. If called upon to testify in any investigation, this 
is the line to which, however reluctantly, I shall be compelled to 
here.” G. Baur, Ph.D. 

