May 23, 1884.] 
they occur abundantly out of the vicinity of faults; 
2°, that the fault-plane, wherever exposed, shows such 
a dip (about 45°) as it would naturally have if deter- 
mined by one of the angles of the fold; 3°, that the 
angles of the flexure form a line of least resistance, 
along which displacement would certainly occur, did 
any force tend to produce it; 4°, that numerous in- 
dications in this region point to great superficial 
tension. 
Lie Ze 
I think all of the above reasons will sufficiently 
explain themselves except the last, in illustration of 
which I give a very interesting section occurring in 
the region known as New Garden, in Russel county. 
In the plan, fig. 3, x y is the line of Clinch-Mountain 
fault, from which a short fault, ¢ d, goes off at right 
angles, on one side of which, F, the coal-measures are 
nearly horizontal and undisturbed. On the other 
side the strata are pressed into a fold, as shown in the 
section, fig. 4, where x y is the fault-plane; E, the 
subcarboniferous limestone; b, the Knox limestone; 
and a, the coal-measures forming the crest of a lofty 
mountain. 
There are no signs of igneous action along any of 
the faults, unless the evidences of ancient thermal 
springs along the line of Walkers Mountain fault be 
so regarded. These indications are, 1°, the band of 
gypsum, which for many miles skirts the fault on 
its south-east or upthrow side, at a distance of about 
a half or three-fourths of a mile from the fault- 
line (it is the same as that’mentioned by Mr. Bien 
in Science, April 18, but does not, as he seems to 
surmise, enter Burk’s Garden, which is some distance 
away on the opposite side of the fault); 2°, the Salt- 
ville basin, the bottom of which ‘is, by estimate, not 
less than two hundred feet below the bed of Holston 
River, the excavation of which in the limestone must 
be accounted for by other agencies than ordinary 
river-erosion; besides, its structure is such as to render 
it improbable that it ever formed a portion of a river- 
valley. 
In conclusion, if there were, as assumed, an increase 
of tension by lateral pressure toward the surface, 
SCIENCE. 
615 
disturbances of strata would begin near the surface, 
resulting in sharp folds of the character described, 
which, in turn, would determine the locality of the 
faults, the tendency of which would be to extend 
progressively downward. G. H. SQUIER. 
Trempealeau, Wis., May 10. 
Assumptions of museum-keepers. 
In Mr. Goode’s interesting summary of ‘ The ex- 
ploring voyage of the Challenger,’ I notice a para- 
graph that merits attention. Recalling the fact that 
the deep-sea fishes have been in Dr. Gunther’s hands 
‘now eight years,’ and lamenting the delay in pub- 
lishing the results, he very justly says, that ‘‘ the pre- 
liminary descriptions published in 1878 are so meagre 
as to be nearly useless to any one except their author,” 
and immediately adds, that ‘‘ the type specimens them- 
selves will, of course, be inaccessible for comparison 
until the final report is in type’’ (Science, iii. p. 580). 
Had it not been for private information with which 
I had been favored, I might have supposed that the 
concluding paragraph was an example of what has 
been called ‘heterophemy,’ and that my excellent 
friend had intended to say that the type specimens 
themselves will, of course, be accessible for compari- 
son. It was, however, with the greatest astonishment 
that I learned, some months ago, that access had been 
denied to the collection in question by Dr. Gunther, 
and that, for instance, an eminent and accomplished 
European ichthyologist, on a visit to England, had 
been refused the right of examination. I say advisably 
right rather than privilege ; for I had always believed 
that the British museum was a public institution, sup- 
ported by liberal grants from the nation, and created 
to facilitate and promote scientific investigation, and 
not intended for personal aggrandizement, or to up- 
hold any officer in petty spite. On what possible 
ground can Dr. Giinther withhold the opportunity for 
examination of any specimens in his keepership to any 
competent naturalist? It may be conceded, causdé 
argumenti, that he has a right to name any specimens, 
and, at any rate, the matter is of too small moment 
to question at present; but I do not know on what 
principle he can withhold a sight of any specimen for 
a day even. A naturalist has, doubtless, a right to 
keep his own collection, bought with his own money, 
secluded, and to deny the privilege of examining a 
specimen to any one, although I have more than once 
heard such a procedure designated by the forcible and 
expressive, even if inelegant, word, ‘hoggish;’ but 
such action is worse than illiberal, and becomes crim- 
inal, in the case of a public officer. It is criminal 
because it is a breach of trust; for the custodian is 
a keeper, employed and paid by the government to 
care for the collections amassed for the people. De- 
nial of the opportunity to examine such collections, 
under proper restrictions, may also, as intimated by 
Mr. Goode, result in the direct retardation or sup- 
pression of scientific activity. If Mr. Goode and my 
private information are correct in fact, the policy of 
the british museum, as interpreted by at least one 
of its officers, is petty, selfish, hindering to science, 
and subversive of public trust, or the officer exercis- 
ing such powers is criminal in monstrous usurpation 
of delegated authority. In any event, a protest is 
called for; and I, for one, do make protest against 
such and all similar restrictions. While constant 
clamor is made, in the nominal interest of ‘science,’ 
for appropriations to advance scientific investigation, 
we may at least demand that the trustees for handling 
such appropriations shall not become barnacles to 
prevent its healthy progress. THEO. GIMLt. 
Washington, May 10. 
