February 26, 1886.] 



SCIEXCE. 



189 



depths, and the consequent upward expansions are 

 greater. This is caused by the gyratory motion of 

 the water around this region. The deflecting force of 

 the earth's rotation arising from this motion, being 

 on all sides to the right of the direction of motion, 

 drives the surface water, together with the seaweed 

 from all sides, into this region; so that there is a little 

 heaping-up of the water in tbis region above that 

 caused by the greater upward expansion : and this 

 causes a settling-down and a flowing-out at all sides 

 below, where the gyratory velocity, on account of 

 greater friction, is less, and the consequent inward 

 pressure toward the central part less, than they are 

 above. This carries the warm surface water down- 

 ward, and makes the average temperature for all 

 depths and the upward expansion greater here than 

 in the surrounding parts ; and this, together with the 

 slight accumulation of the mass in the region of the 

 Sargossa Sea, raises its level several feet. 



Where wind drives the water against a barrier or 

 shore, as in the case of Lake Ontario or the Atlantic 

 Ocean, regular progressive currents from top to bot- 

 tom in the same direction cannot be established ; but 

 the surface water which is driven forward must 

 return below, or at the sides if the wind blows over 

 the middle part only. In such cases the greatest 

 change of sea-level takes place soon after the winds 

 begin to blow in any given direction, while the whole 

 force is spent upon a comparatively thin stratum. It 

 is well known that winds blowing over a very shal- 

 low stratum of water, or along the length of a very 

 shallow canal, may produce a considerable change of 

 level : whereas, if the depth were considerable, the 

 change would be but little. At first, while the whole 

 force of the wind is -spent upon the surface water of 

 a lake or ocean, the great body of undisturbed water 

 below is the same as so much solid matter. But after 

 the surface water has been driven to one side, and 

 the pressure there increased, which gives rise to the 

 return current below, — when this has been fully estab- 

 lished, the difference of sea-level at the two sides or 

 ends, from and to which the wind blows, is less. 



W. Ferrel. 



Washington, D.C., Feb. 1*. 



The Davenport tablets. 



Please allow me to trouble you once more, and 

 finally, in reference to the Davenport tablets. 



Mr. Putnam says, " If Professor Thomas will take 

 the Grave Creek tablet, or even the famous Eosetta 

 stone, and sit down before them with his Webster's 

 * Unabridged,' he will find no end of similar resem- 

 blances." Very true, as the alphabets used on the 

 Eosetta stone are some of those given by Webster, 

 and the characters on the Grave Creek tablet have 

 been taken from half a dozen different alphabets, 

 which is one of the chief reasons why it is generally 

 rejected by modern archeologists (see Dr. Wilson's 

 scathing criticism in his 'Prehistoric man,' third 

 edition, vol. ii. pp. 99-111). 



Mr. Putnam's criticism of Mr. Tiffany's letter, on 

 account of illiteracy, is in strange contrast with the 

 records of the Davenport academy, which show that 

 Mr. Tiffany was ore of its four original organizers 

 (Proc, vol. vi. p. 1), was a member of the museum 

 committee, was one of the board of trustees named 

 in the constitution and articles of incorporation, was 

 a member of the committee on finance (Proc, vol. i. 

 pp. 4, 7, and 8), was more than once selected as one 



of a committee of three to draught resolutions (Proc, 

 vol. i. pp. 23 and 71), was one of a committee of two 

 appointed to take steps toward erecting a building, 

 was for some years treasurer of the academy (Proc, 

 vol. i. p. 67), and did considerable mound-explor- 

 ing, for which special credit is given in the presi- 

 dent's annual address of 1876. 



It is true that in the letter, from which I quoted 

 only so much as touched upon the points then under 

 discussion, Mr. Tiffany expresses entire confidence 

 in the shale tablets, which is proof that his expres- 

 sion of doubt in regard to the 1 limestone tablet ' 

 was not for the purpose of ' defaming his old asso- 

 ciates,' but because the evidence satisfied him it was 

 a plant. 



In answer to Mr. Putnam's singular philosophy 

 respecting the entrance of water into the little vault 

 where the limestone tablet was found, it is only 

 necessary to refer to the figure and description of 

 mound 11, heretofore given. As neither cement, 

 plastering, clay, nor mortar was used, it would 

 have been, as every mound-explorer knows, a mira- 

 cle if water had failed to enter the vault, and, in the 

 course of centuries, fill it with dirt. Moreover, in 

 the course of time the superincumbent weight would 

 have pressed the slab which covered the vault down 

 upon the tablet. 



Archeologists, so far as they have spoken, have, 

 almost without exception, indicated in their published 

 works a want of faith in these tablets. Short, in his 

 ' North Americans of antiquity' (p. 40), says, " The 

 above conjectures as to the significance of the repre- 

 sentations on these tablets are based upon the suppo- 

 sition that they are genuine, and not the work of an 

 impostor, of which ive cannot refrain from expressing 

 a slight suspicion" Eev. J. P. MacLean, speaking 

 of the cremation scene, says, "Among the cabalistic 

 characters, the word ' town' stands out in bold lines, 

 and the figure ' 8 ' appears in rude shape among 

 other marks. The picture of a face occurs in the 

 sun, resembling the face of a European. The artist 

 has overdone his work : it needs no further investi- 

 gation" (' Mound-builders,' p. 116). Yet Mr. Mac- 

 Lean is one of two (Dr. Willis De Haas is the other), 

 of whom Mr. Putnam remarks in his recent annual 

 address to the academy, as published in the local 

 papers, "There are thus no more competent arche- 

 ologists in the country." Mr. Peet, in the American 

 antiquarian of July, 1878, expresses the same opin- 

 ion as Mr. MacLean. Prof. M. C. Eead, in the 

 American antiquarian of April-July, 1882, ex- 

 presses a doubt as to their authenticity, based upon 

 the characters they bear. Dr. E. Schmidt, in an 

 article entitled ' The mound-builders and their rela- 

 tion to the historical Indians ' (Kosmos, 1884, p. 146), 

 remarks, "It is hardly necessary to be pointed out 

 that none of the notorious tablets are without sus- 

 picion, and that all which have been subjected to 

 earnest investigation have turned out to be gross 

 forgeries." It appears from these notices that I am 

 not alone in expressing doubt as to the authenticity 

 of these tablets. 



Notwithstanding the kind invitation of the acad- 

 emy to visit their museum and inspect the tablets, I 

 preferred, for the present, to base my arguments on 

 the publications of the academy (the albertypes in- 

 cluded) and the statements of its members, as this 

 avoided'recourse to personal judgment, and appealed 

 only to what is before the public. Even the extracts 

 from Mr. Tiffany's and Mr. Pratt's letters were in 



