
          Cincinnati Jany. [January] 18. 1854


 Dear Doctor


 I was exceedingly obliged to you
 for your kind letter in 1848 on the subject of some
 plants [crossed out: which] from Lake Superiour which I sent to 
 you. I intended it for my report to government.
 But as Dr Jackson was unceremoniously superseded
 under Secretary Ewing it was never called
 for. Some time last fall I communicated your
 letter to Silliman's Journal and received a note from
 Prof. Dana saying it should be published in the Jany [January] No.


 The Jany [January] No. came but without the Article. I wrote to 
 call Mr. Dana's attention to the fact when I was informed by 
 him that he had sent my paper to [crossed out: Dr.] Prof. Gray who had
 withheld it and that I should find Prof G's [Gray's] reasons for so
 doing in a letter from Prof Gray forwarded to me at
 Newark, N.J. I have now received that letter. The following
 is a copy:


 "Cambridge Dec. 3. 1853,"


 My Dear Dana,


 Just receiving your favour of the 1st inst
 I have immediately examined the Calamagrostis arenaria
 as I took it to be from Lake Superiour and Michigan
 (which I have for some years possessed) and I see enough
 to show that Dr. Torrey will probably have to revise
 his opinion given in 1848 that it is a new species. I expect
 him to be with me at Christmas and I will therefore take
 the responsibility (Since the principal part of Dr. Locke's
 communication is made up of Dr. Torrey's letter of 
 retaining this til then and of consulting him about it.


 Meanwhile science will not suffer; inasmuch as
 two detailed lists of Lake Superiour plants (comprising all
 these) have since been published viz: that of Agassiz'
 Lake Superiour book and that of Whitney Geological 
 Report on exploration of [illegible] region. In explanation

        