212 
MULE DEER. 
from the C. Macrotis of Sat. We proposed to him that he should give a short descrip- 
tion of the species, and select the name, which we would afterwards adopt in our work — 
this is in accordance with the mode usually pursued, and would have only occupied an hour. 
After the lapse of several years, we made an application by letter to the directors of the 
Institution for the privilege of making a drawing of the specimen; this we were not only 
refused, but w'ere even denied tlie privilege of looking at the specimen, which we were very 
anxious to see, in order to be enabled to point out in the mo.st satisfactory manner the 
characteristics by which these two closely allied species of Doer inhabiting our country 
could be distinguished from each other. 
We cannot but contrast the narrow-minded policy pursued towards us in our application at 
Washington, with the liberality and generosity which was at all times extended to us in Europe 
under similar circumstances. When w'e visited England in 1838, the Directors of the Zoological 
Society opened its museum and assigned to us a private room, of which tliey gave ns the 
key, and wliich we occupied for nearly a month — the specimens were taken from the eases 
by their attendants and brought to us, and when we discovered in the collection nndeseribed 
species, we were encouraged and aided in describing them. The same facilities w’ere afforded 
us in tire British museum, and in those of Edinburgh, Palis, Berlin, Dresden, and Zurich. 
The British Government, as well as our own, gave us all tiie assistance which could be 
rendered by either, consistent with other public services, and we derived material advantages 
from the aid afforded us by the revenue service and the various military stations we have 
visited in our researches, in Labrador — in Florida — in the far West, and in Texas. 
We know not who were the Directors of the National Institute when our reasonable 
request was so cavalierly rejected, nor have we inquired whether any changes in policy 
have since taken place in regard to tlie collection of animals at Washington, but we feel it 
our duty publicly to protest against a conduct so narrow, selfish, and inconsistent with the 
liberality of onr free institutions and so little adapted to promote one of the objects sought 
to be gained by the exploring expedition — viz : the advancement of natural history. 
When the Hudsons Bay Company received an intimation that we would be glad to obtain 
any specimens they could furnish us from their tVading posts in the arctic regions, they im- 
mediately gave orders to their agents and we secured from them rare animals and skins, pro- 
cured at considerable labour and expense, and sent to us without cost, knowing and believ- 
ing that in benefitting the cause of natural science they would receive a sufficient reward. 
