72 
An Unjust Attack — Frazer. 
at least such a one as they would recommend, all of which required a 
review of the general subject of the Quaternary formations of the country,, 
and the more or less final settlement of many problems yet under dis¬ 
cussion.” Certainly no action of the committee justified major Powell in 
supposing that his abstract report did not meet its approval. As soon as 
he declared at New Haven that he considered his report to be the abstract 
(dictated and type-written at the Buckingham Hotel the evening before 
the meeting with Section E devoted to the American Committee, and read 
before it with the other abstracts) the committee ordered it printed like 
the other reports. It is true that Prof. Spencer contributed a part of Prof. 
Cope’s report G treating of the Plistocene, but that was strictly in accord 
with the policy which major Powell so strongly insists on, of allowing 
freedom of thought to all, so that the best may finally survive. If “na 
body of men is so wise or powerful that it can establish the science of 
geology by authority,” would he claim that one man can be so wise or 
powerful as to establish his view of the Quaternary by authority? 
This is clearly a case where two geologists, to use his own words, have 
“gone on devising, amending, and improving their systems severally, each 
new worker adopting such a system as he may think best, until by a 
course of intelligent selection, a common system is evolved.” Yet so vastly 
easier is theory than practice that major Powell was not true to his own 
principles, for “seeing that the report prepared by myself was like that of 
Prof. Williams, upon a general theory of procedure different from that 
held by most of the persons who were present at the meetings of the com¬ 
mittee, I withdrew it at the time I resigned from the committee and 
another member was appointed who prepared a paper more in harmony 
with the general views.” But major Powell has already said that other 
reporters had treated of the Quaternary before he resigned. The newly 
appointed Reporter on the Quaternary therefore had the same difficulties, 
but nevertheless performed his work. It would be interesting to know 
what the general views of the American Committee on the Quaternary are. 
The writer is not aware that they have been expressed. The report of 
Prof. Williams “is in harmony with my conclusions and I believe germane 
to the purpose for which the committee was organized. The other papers 
are not germane to the proper function of the committee as understood by 
myself,” etc. This reads like two premises with the understood con¬ 
clusion that “papers which are not in harmony with ‘my conclusions’ are 
not germane to the proper functions of the committee.” But if this be an 
argument, what becomes of the liberty of thought and freedom of the 
individual worker? It really looks as if major Powell were not consistent 
in this position, for immediately af ten wards he assigns as a reason for not 
associating himself with the committee, that these Reporters have employed 
various taxonomic schemes, none of which are used in the U. S. Geological 
Survey. 
Philadelphia , Dec. 11,1888. Persifor Frazer. 
I fully concur in the above statements made by Dr. Persifor Frazer. 
T. Sterry Hurt. 
Organizer and Secretary of the Comite-fondateur of the International 
Geological Congress; Member and late Secretary of the American 
Committee of the Congress; Vice-President at the Sessions of the 
Congress at Paris, Bologne and London; Member of the present Inter¬ 
national Geological Council. 
New York, December 19,1888. 
