14 The American Geologist. Jannat}, Soe 
by that investigator, following this with a vigorous, but calm, 
protest “against the style and manner of the articles which 
‘have appeared in condemnation of the work and in denuncia- 
tion of the writer.” He next wards off charges of favoritism 
by showing up some of the weakness of the author in question 
and continues in masterful tone: ’ 
“There is, however, little occasion here to expose the weak 
points of the volume, because this has already been done in’ 
a most excellent and exhaustive manner [by his critics] * * 
We believe that he [Mr. Wright] may comfort himself with the 
thought that the worst that could be said has been said con- 
cerning his little volume.” 
He follows this with statements and quotations to show 
that several writers have been abusive and unjust, merely be- 
cause professor Wright’s theological views are unacceptable to 
them. He calls attention to the harm done to science by this 
revival of the old intolerant spirit of which scientists have com- 
plained when held or exercised by earlier theologians, and 
shows that the general public will, although erroneously, lay 
the blame upon the cause of science. 
But when we consider all that Dr. Claypole himself had 
borne, in his hard struggles, on account of this very weapon 
of theological bias, and how much reason he might have had 
for joining those who mocked, the following paragraph from 
his pen reveals depths of character and breadth of mind not 
frequent among us, to say the least: 
“Some of the critics have gone out of their way to make caustic 
remarks on the profession of the author. Surely they should be 
familiar enough with the records of science to be aware that in spite 
of all obstacles which theology has thrown in her path, many theolo- 
gians have risen superior to their environment, and to them geology 
is deeply indebted. Without the labors of Buckland, Sedgwick and 
Woodward, Bonney, Blake, Crosskey, Fisher and Renard, Haughton 
and Hitchcock, many valuable chapters would be missing from her 
literature. Instead of regretting that a theological professor should 
be found in the geological field, it would be more seemly to wish that 
there were more such men. Instead of showing apparent jealousy, all 
helpers should be made welcome. Official reserve and exclusive- 
ness are out of place in science. The field is the world, the harvest 
is plenteous, and the laborers are ‘all too few.” 
Sublimely eloquent words are these to be uttered by one 
whose early history was such as has been tamely outlined in 
