FES. 24 
THE 
BUBAL I^EW-TOBKEB. 
423 
PROF, C. V. RILEY’S REPLY. 
reply were so offensive, that I Immediately wrote 
my letter of resignation. WlshlDg to present It lu 
person 1 went two or three times to the Commis¬ 
sioner’s room, bat found him. each time, occupied 
with visitors. I then asked Mr. Carman, the Chief 
Clerk, to take it In, explaining to him Us purport. 
To the Editor of the Rural New Yorker: 
Dear Sir in your Issue for dan. 31st, you seek 
to defend the charges to which I took exception, 
by a long letter from the present Commissioner of 
Agriculture. You are kind enough to ask suspen¬ 
sion of Judgment till lam again heard from, and 
to hope that any further controversy may prove 
"short, pertinent, and decisive.” More lies are 
easily crowded into one line than con he refuted 
In a hundred; but, so far as a reply to nearly (our 
columns of what La largely misrepresentation can 
be made short, l will eudoavor to make ltso. Your 
first and second statements, the truth or which l 
denied, are comparatively unimportant; nor do I 
see that you have proved the first, or that I sought 
the position tu any way beyond that which 1 men¬ 
tioned. In reply to my second denial, you state 
that you received a letter rrom me asking you to 
pronounce upon my utness, and so on. 1 beg you to 
produce Unit letter In proof, as 1 have uo recollec¬ 
tion of It. 
Him letter Itself huB not been preserved. The fol- 
lowm, Hjuaavlte are offered in proof that it wnsra- 
. This isTo certify that a letter, signed C.V. Kilev. anil 
directed to the Editor of the *' Rural Now* Yorker,was 
received urtew weeks prior to lux uppointment as Kn- 
lomulOKi-t to the Department of Agrioultiifo The 
purport ol the letter was ati follows: "My muue Iium 
lieou lueutumod in connect ion with the position of 
Lntofnolojrtst to ILiu Department Of Apiculture, made 
vaivnit by the Ulness of Prof. (Mover. Would you kindly 
port ion Y” 111 ' orjM>t ' J O " docihino (nullified to till that 
Blfcued •*?: ‘i 1 Camman, Editor Rural New Yorker." 
( W . E. UitKHEnT, ABHisiant Editor.] 
The State, City and county! 
of New-Youk. i **• 
•can ‘ 
l anil sworn to 
The foregoim: writing was subscribe! 
before me this yth February, is.su. 
i. B. Nones, Notary Public, 
si Duane 8 . 1 , N«w-York. 
The letters of recommendation in my behalf, 
which are lu Gen, r,e Due's possession, will show 
(if ho care to produce them) the character of the 
writers, and prove the truth of my statement that 
1 sought, principally the opinion of leading natu¬ 
ralists, particularly entomologists. That i Included 
a few editors of agricultural Journals to which I 
had been lu the habit of contributing, and requested 
them to send their opinion to the commissioner, 
or to me, is most probable; but the expressions of 
the press, as such, were spontaneous, and not 
asked for. 
The burden of your deren.se rests with the fourth 
Statement: viz., that I exerted my bust influence 
to get back to the Department, alter having re¬ 
signed. In support or this charge you ilepeud on 
the evidence of Gen. Le I>uc, at once Indicating 
by whom the charge was prompted. 
I am aware how difficult It Is tor me to prove 
the utter falsity of conversations purporting 
to be reported. Fortunately, however, in this 
case, evidence of fabrication Is frequently appar¬ 
ent ; tor no one who knows me will believe that l 
have given utterance to the language Imputed to 
me In many Instances. For the rest, I must de¬ 
pend on the luaumouy of others. Not to claim too 
much of your valuable space, I can best state the 
truth by reciting, as briefly as possible, the facts 
that in anyway Dear upon my resignation and 
upon the point In dispute, and by referring, as l 
proceed, to the evidence, duly enumerated, which 
I send for your own satisfaction, hut which I hope 
you will make room for at the end of this commun¬ 
ication, even If you have to print It in solid agate 
or diamond. 
He expressed regret at my action, and begged me 
to reconsider tt. I replied that my course had 
been well considered, narrated the facts as Just set 
forth, and finally told ntm that I would reserve the 
letter of resignation till the following morning,-so 
as to give him an opportunity of ascertaining 
whether the commissioner meant his language to 
be Offensive. Upon being Informed by Mr. Car¬ 
man. next day, that the commissioner had vouch¬ 
safed no explanation, I tendered the letter of resig¬ 
nation. A few hours later, Mr. Curinan came to 
my room and stated that my resignation had been 
accepted, but that the Commissioner desired me to 
remain until the 1 st of July. I declined lodo so, re¬ 
marking that I did not care to remain beyond the 
time necessary lo get. matters In shape for my suc¬ 
cessor. At the Si mo tlruc 1 asked him what was the 
cause of the Commissioner's offensive manner, and 
was toformed that he (the Commissioner) charged 
me with the Interference In the matter of legisla¬ 
tion presently referred lo. This was not ‘ some 
days later “ as Mr. Carman states lu Ids card,” but 
the very day or my resignation, which was Satur¬ 
day ; for It was on the following day (t was In the 
hahltof spending Sunday morning at the Depart 
ment, and generally found Mr. carman and the 
Commissioner there), that I went, to llio Commis¬ 
sioner; stated what. Mr. Carman had told me; 
denied having had anything to do with the matter 
with which I was charged, and told him that for 
my own satisfaction aud vindication 1 would en¬ 
deavor to ascertain the facts. From that time on 
I never gave Mr, carman, either by word or act, 
the first reason for supposing Ihat. t wished to he 
reinstated, and It Is evident from the latter part 
of his card that ho has confounded with such 
wish my expressed determination to give the 
Commissioner proof of hts error, and that in 
other particulars his memory has played him 
raise. [The foregoing statement from the c lu 
brackets, has been shown to Mr. Carman, see 
evidence marked C.J That some of tho state¬ 
ments which I am reported to have made in 
conversation with the commissioner, may bo un¬ 
derstood, it la necessary to premise that In accept¬ 
ing the position of Entomologist to the Department, 
In the spring of ISIS, I nominally retained the 
chieftainship of the U. S. Entomological Commis¬ 
sion, with which l had been honored, hut renounced 
the Halary aud active charge. For reasons best 
known to himself, and entirely without the knowl¬ 
edge or request of any member or the Com minion, 
the chairman of the House Committee on Appro¬ 
priations, (Mr. Atkins), had caused the words 
"and the cotton worm” to be added to the cIiiuho 
I n the Sundry civil Bill appropriating for the 
worker the Commission on the Rocky Mountain 
locust,. This seemed like a retlectlon on the De¬ 
partment, which was then carrying on the cotton- 
worm investigation under my direction. Commis¬ 
sioner Le Due. on the Sunday alluded to, confessed 
that his previous offensive manuer was due to 
the belief that those quoted words were Inserted 
at ray Instance, but superadded insult by hesitat¬ 
ing to accept my word to the contrary. He even 
repudiated the evidence In the following letter, 
subsequently obtained for my own satisfaction. 
Committee on Appropriations,) 
House ok Rkfrbskntativks, 
Wasuinoton, D. C., April 1, 1ST9.J 
f accepted tne position of Entomologist to the 
Department with a full determinat ion to endeavor 
to accomplish practical good. With this view, 
one of my first efforts was to secure, with t he 
Commissioner’s aid, an appropriation tor tho En¬ 
tomological Division, or *5,000, by the passage of 
the following clause, taken from the legislative 
bill, and penned by myself: 
" For Investigating the history and habits of in¬ 
sects lnjuiltms lo agriculture; for experiments In 
ascertaining the best means or destroying them- 
tor chemicals, traveling, and other expenses in 
itu- pracuml work oj the tmu/molooiml cllols- 
*W*.. .*5000.00.” 
I also successfully used ray efforts to have an¬ 
other special appropriation of *5000.00, for the in¬ 
vestigation of Insects uffecllng the cotton plant, 
diverted lothe Department, senator Morgan, or 
Alabama, who drafted the bill, and who originally 
wanted a separate commission, will testify to the 
fact. 
l deposited In the Department my entomological 
library and collection, and began to Introduce va¬ 
rious needed reforms. For a while everything 
wont on most agreeably, but. finally 1 had some diffi¬ 
culty in getting the Commissioner to heed, aud, 
more particularly, to carry out, sundry proposi¬ 
tions; and l gradually came so to deplore his ab¬ 
rupt and overhearing manner that, I twice ex¬ 
pressed to him my belief that i was not the klud 
of man he wanted, and had, perhaps, bet ter retire. 
I remained upon assurances to me contrary, and 
upon finding that my own experience was not, ex¬ 
ceptional. As Entomologist of the Department 1 
naturally felt Interested in, and largely respon¬ 
sible tor, the results to Mow from the expenditure 
of me special appropriations above alluded to, and 
which had never heroi c been made to the Depart¬ 
ment; and, finding that they were belug used tor 
other general expenses of the division, which had 
In previous years been met by appropriations to 
tho Depart ment, I Tell obliged to remonst raie 
against such diversion, on ono occasion, In order 
tu avoid such diversion in the future, I urged the 
Commissioner to have the regular employees of 
the division specifically provided for in the regular 
estimates. (In the present year’s estimates these 
appropriations are asked for In the exact form lu 
which 1 urged them, thus proving the force aud 
necessity of tny suggestion i He remarked: "I’ror. 
ltlley, I feel myself abunda utly able to run this 
Department. When 1 want you to do so I will let 
you know.” 
[Cj Both the manner and the language of his 
Professor C. V. Riley, Dear sir .-—Your letter 
ofthe 3rd. Inst, Is at hand. The words "and l he 
cotton worm ” to which you reler In your letter as 
being contained lu the sundry civil BUI, were 
liibei ted at my Instance, and upon my responsi¬ 
bility alone, without suggestions trom you or from 
any one else, Respect,fully, 
L. D, C. Atklnb. 
It is true that when l learned the cause of the 
Commissioner’s Irrllatlon I took pains to prove 
that ho had wronged me; and lor tills purpose 
wrote to the only persons who would he likely to 
know the foots aud my course In the matter, ex¬ 
pressly stating that l did so for my own satisfac¬ 
tion, and not with a view of remaining lu the De¬ 
partment. These persons were the lion. Mr. 
Atkins, whose letter 1a above reproduced; sena- 
alors A. S. Paddock aud Win. Wlndom, who were 
at tho time chairmen respectively of the commit¬ 
tees on Agriculture and Appropriations in the 
Senate; and Professor Thomas and Dr. Packard, 
my co-laborers on the Entomological Commission. 
[See letter marked A. They were all or Uie same 
purport except that those to the Senators also 
called attention to previous letters, in which I 
had endeavored to have the offending words 
stricken out,.) The replies of the two lust named 
gentlemen were addressed direct to the commls- 
oner, and 1 have not seen them, if they expressed 
any hope that llio difficulty would bo adjusted or 
that, I should remain, It was, (as la the case ot 
Senator Paddock), without request or mine, as 
they will testify. The other letters were address¬ 
ed to me and submitted by me to the Commis¬ 
sioner (see letter marked P, that from Senator 
Wlndom being to the same effect,) [A rew days 
arter the above mentioned occurrence, the Wash¬ 
ington papers und others, announced that I had 
resigned on account of Ill-health, and was going 
West to recuperate—the presumption being that 
the Information emanated man the Department. 
This obliged me to give tho facts, which i did In 
the following card dated April 3. Slip A. 
I To the Editor of tho Post I 
Sir; It has been announced In your columns and 
elsewhere, that l have resigned my position as 
Entomologist of the Department of Agriculture on 
account of Ill-health, etc. Those who originated 
such a report must have had some other end lu 
view than truth, and 1 cannot have such a report 
wired over the country, to excite unnecessary 
anxiety among friends, without correcting it. 
My health was never bettor, and tho real cause 
of my resignation may be gathered from the fol¬ 
lowing letter tendering It: (Letter already pub¬ 
lished In the Commissioner's communication.) 
It Is to bo regretted—but not on my own account 
—that the public and private expressions about the 
matter were not more gratifying to the Commis¬ 
sioner. 
Regarding the Baltimore Gazette paragraph to 
which the Commissioner devoted a column and a 
halt, T cannot see what It has to do with the 
question In hand; for If It proves anything It con¬ 
firms my statements, since I should certainly not 
have taken that mode of conciliating the Com¬ 
missioner, had I desired reinstatement. The report 
Is, however, sufficiently erroneous to bavo done 
me more harm t-hau It did General Le Due, and 
the following letter will throw some light and 
truth thereon. 
Dki-aktmknt of Agriculture.) 
Entomological Division, April 17,lS79,f 
Sir .-Your favor of the Kith, Inclosing a para¬ 
graph rrom the Baltimore Gazette and requesting 
my avowal, denial or explanation of certain 
charges against you. with which my name Is 
therein coupled has been handed to me. 
I have already given you orally. In a general 
way, the facts tn connection with said paragraph, 
so far us i have any knowledge of them, but am 
glad of tho opportunity of doing so formally anri 
specifically, especially since i navu been further 
misrepresented by the Editor of the Sunday Re¬ 
public, who, at your instance as he avowed called 
on me last week to get the fuels in relation to an¬ 
other paragraph lu the Louisville Courier-Journal, 
based upon Hie Gazette Item, but coufauitng sun¬ 
dry additions. I stated to him the facts m the 
case, as they are given below ; yet. In the last 
Issue of his paper he purs words tu mv mout h 
which I never uttered, ami. by a reckless disre¬ 
gard for tho truth, places himself In the same 
category with those whom he )usliy condemns. 
Tho reporter of the Baltimore Gazette Introduced 
himself as such, at my residence soon after my 
rc.slg nation, with the avowed purpose or learning 
more as to Hie cause of said resignation. A 
stranger to me, 1 informed mm mat the reasons 
were given m my published letter tendering It; 
that it was.purely a personal matter; that in of¬ 
fering some suggestions for the benefit ot uiv 
Divisiou, jou had treated me with what I consul 
ei ed insulting manner and language, that you had 
wrongly charged me with having been Instrumen¬ 
tal lu getting the w ords * and Urn cm,ton worm,” 
added to tne clause In the Sundry nvii Bill ap¬ 
propriation lor the Uulted states Entomological 
Commission; that- you hesitated to accept my 
word to. the contrary; and, finally, that full and 
satisfactory proof of my veracity and of .your error 
had been furnished by men familiar with the 
tacts. 
The reporter then cited various charges that 
have been aud arc being made against vou. l 
Iniormeu him. in reply, mat my resignation had 
nothing to do with them, except so far as i might 
have incurred your displeasure by having remon¬ 
strated against me diversion of the special appro¬ 
priations tor the Investigation ot Injurious insects 
to the payment ot the clerks and draftsman em¬ 
ployed in the Entomological Division. 
1 deny having said anything unout the cotton 
worimund tu-log so drawn upon that 1 could not 
operate with success, or about aoraitsnmn being 
sent, to Minnesota to make plans for a uow house 
lor you, 
The loose paragraphs about my resignation 
which have misrepresented me,from bung colored 
by some underlying personal motive onilie part 
of the writers (hereof, have been extremely 
aDuoj lug lo me, as 1 would gladly avoid this kind 
ot notoriety, 
or your conduct, which Induced my resignation, 
I have just cause for complaint; but ft, was totally 
foreign to the gossip utloat about the Department 
management, of which l have heard enough since 
my resignation to make mo trebly satlshed with 
the course 1 have taken. 
Your letter, with Inclosed slip, is returned here¬ 
with, as requested. Respectfully, 
G. V. Rilkv, EMomoloQUt, 
W. G. Le Duo, Corunusniomr eff Ayncultiirei. 
The above letter gives the truth about the Inter¬ 
view, and it states only what r hud previously- 
stated to the Commissioner by word of mouth. 
Mr. Butler look no notea during the Interview, and 
he drew on his Imagination or on .other sources of 
Information lu so far as his report, departs from 
my statements. I pronounce the reputed steno¬ 
graphic report of my verbal remarks In the main 
erroneous aud misleading, wbllo the interview hud 
with me by Mr. Brlsbtn Walker was, from the 
subsequent, untruthful report or It, so evidently 
contrived tor a purpose, that It la hardly necessary 
to add In confirmation of that Interpretation of 
tt that, as I huve good reason for believing, Mr. 
Walker was at the lime receiving *uhi per month 
for his services tn preparing and edltffig items 
Intended to popularize and laud the Department 
and the Commissioner; aud that he has since 
been sent to Colorado as an agent ot the Depart¬ 
ment to “ Investigate mineral lands.” lie would 
be an Idiot Indeed who, after acknowledging and 
explaining tho Interview, should deny Its having 
1 aken place I The following letter was addressed 
to Mr. Walker but never published. 
f Letter to the Editor of tho Republic. April 11.187«] 
I had thought that the letter tendering my resig¬ 
nation of the position of Entomologist to the De¬ 
partment of Agriculture, which l found It neces¬ 
sary to make public In order to correct an 
erroneous announcement regarding my health, 
was a sufficient explanation of my couducr.. The 
reputed conversation with me to wlilch you refer 
as contained tu the Louisville courier Journal, 
couples my name In an unwarranted manner with 
tho charges agaffifct Commissioner i.e Due which 
have lately been bruited about; and l so Hi formed 
you when you called upon me. But 1 also in¬ 
formed you ot the facts l n regard lo tho ortgln of 
the paragraph In Question, and neither uttered tho 
words wlilch you put into my mouth nor gave ex¬ 
pression to anything that would warrant such a 
quotation, ua tho contrary 1 told you that the 
paragraph was made up, with additions, from u 
report in at first appeurodlntbo Baltimore Uuzetto 
and that t his last, was based upon an Interview 
wim mo by a reporter of that paper who Intro¬ 
duced himself at my residence audwliu managed to 
misrepresent, my siauunenis almost as tnoroughly 
us you have done. 
Regarding the so-called reports of my conversa¬ 
tions on the ciith of April, they are so incomplete, 
garbled and misleading that, they show one of two 
things: either, first, that Mr. La Dow (tho steno¬ 
grapher whose occupation Is to be ever near the 
Commissioner to take down conversation) Is a most 
indifferent reporter and the Commissioner's mind 
aud memory very faulty: or, second, that the one 
Is a tool ot the other fu willful misrepresentation. 
I have a vivid recollection of the whole conversa¬ 
tion, and herewith give tho Tacts with the evidence 
In eonflrmaUon, so tar as It can be given, it was 
Thursday and I was to leave on the .Saturday ot 
that week. I had already moved my affairs from 
the Department; had been in correspondence with 
Prof. Comstock and knew (hat he lmd assurances 
of being my successor, i ll.] He had. In considering 
a previous arrangement with me, stated that his 
term at Cornell ended .June 1 st. [H.] and this ract 
with tho further fact that, as the day of my leav¬ 
ing approached. It became evident that certain 
special work on the cotton insect report could 
not,he satisfactorily finished, had led mein various 
conversations with the Chief Clerk to discuss the 
propriety ot continuing work l ill the 1st of June, 
and of modifying my previous declination to re¬ 
main MU July. At Mr, carman's suggestion I 
broached the subject to tho Commissioner, ex¬ 
plaining why It would perhaps, be best for me to 
finish the work referred to; that there were parts 
of the south that I much desired to visit, and that 
1 would remain till June 1st If ho desired It.. Ho 
replied that ho understood I desired It; to which 
f retorted that I was Indifferent., and the matter 
ended. We then conversed for some Hme on va¬ 
rious subjects connected with my resignation. I 
expressed a wish to know (ns lie had up to that 
time preserved silence on the subject) whether he 
still thought, after the evidence, that I was guilty 
of what he had charged me with. He. replied in 
the negative uttd said that 1 ought to have been 
less sensitive to hts abrupt manner, as he was fre¬ 
quently annoyed ami irritated by the constant 
flow or visitors into bin office and the consequent 
Interruption to ills work. I confessed to possi¬ 
ble haste, but felt t hat my course was Justified by 
his subsequent action, as 1 Icid known for some 
time from letters received from Prof. Thomas that 
he had emphatically declined, and no disposition 
had been shown on Ills (the Commissioner's) part 
to retract or settle our differences. I then, in re- 
ply to the charge of Instigating (he statement In 
the Butler report about Prof. Thomas’s "CausUc 
letter of refusal ” explained the facts very much 
as they are given herewith and also stated Prof. 
Thomas's position and why he had declined. 
At this meeting I expressed tho desire to see Mr. 
Butler In presence of me Commissioner, since 
there was a question of veracity between us. He 
agreed to have Mr. Butler there the next day, but 
t his gentleman failed to come. 1 then agreed to 
be present again on Saturday at 2 c m. 1 was In 
my office from 2 to 1 p.w, as Mr. Howard, my clerk 
will testify, [M j and at 4 r.jt., or soon thereafter, 
went to the Commissioner’s room to take my final 
leave and expressed disappointment at Mr. B’a not 
coming, when to my surprise the Commissioner 
Raid he had been there, but that I had not been 
sent for as the matter was hardly worth while. 1 
expressed a desire to get. certain of the Depart¬ 
ment reports before leaving, and with the assur¬ 
ance Hist he had always appreciated my ability 
and that he believed I should do better outside 
than lu the Department, we parted amicably. 
This Isa plain statement Of the facte, condensed 
into as few words as possible and vtie trjith of 
which I am ready to testify lo under oath. There 
was much other conversation not particularly rel¬ 
evant. 
A word as to the Thomas letters: Gen’l. Le Due 
quotes one of April 2nd to himself and says : 
" This Is the letter upon which the press com¬ 
mented so severely, giving •* Under the circum¬ 
stances ” as the reason for ills declination. This 
confidentialcommunication found Its was to the 
public through the press aud telegraph, but with 
i lie wording and spirit so garbled 'as re show an 
evident intention and oeslte to have peudffig ne¬ 
gotiations looking to Hie appointment nf Thomas 
suspended, and also that It might,, as for as possi¬ 
ble call down on tho Commissioner the eeusure of 
that portion of the newspaper press which has so 
long been used ror the furtherance or Mr. Riley’s 
purposes. Meanwhile he wrote to Prof. Thomas 
requesting him as a Lrlend tu write tome and try to 
correct wliar, he (Riley) thought; was an erroneous 
Impression; i. e., to help him to get back Into the 
Department,. 
There Is the 3 ame misrepresentation herea 3 
throughout the rest otthe commissioner’s letter. 
I was not sufficiently In Le Due’s confidence Just 
at that time to know anyt hlng of his correspond¬ 
ence, and the " confidential communication ” must 
have “ found Its way to the public” through those 
who were. Urof.Thomas will lesiiry to the falsity ot 
the last charge, t wrote to hint to correct an errone¬ 
ous impression, but not with a view of getting back 
Into the Department. I call attention to letters 
iNos. a, 4, 5 , 6, and 7, tor further evidence. Prof. 
Thomas’s course throughout wins manly and hon¬ 
orable. He was the first person (being then in 
Washington) to whom l signified my intention of 
resigning, and he urged me strenuously not to do 
so. Alter the position had been tendered to him 
he twice declined It, hut was subsequently led to 
accept, certain facts then came to my knowledge 
that led me to believe that It would not be to his 
advant age to accept, lie was led to do so finally 
by a promise of an annual salary of *3 ooo, and 
probably *3,500, but positively declined upon learn¬ 
ing trom me that the commissioner had no legal 
means of giving him such a salary. 1 may add, by 
way of explanation, that 1 accepted the posltt on a 
year before upon similar ;issuranc.es or increased 
salary from the Commissioner, but upon finding 
that there was no chance uf getting the Increase 
which the commissioner expected, in the regular 
appropriations, i was obliged to ask that an addl 
tlonal *i ooo compensation lio allowed me by con¬ 
gress, and got it. This was disallowed, without my 
knowledge, soon after my resignation, and I only 
became aware of the fact after l’rof. Thomas's ac¬ 
ceptance. When 1 learned that Prof. Thomas had 
declined, I used my best endeavors to secure the 
appointment, of Prof. Comstock, In whom 1 felt 
much interest as having been the moat enthusias¬ 
tic student in a class before which I lectured at 
Cornell tn 1872, and of whoso earnestness and ca¬ 
pability I had subsequently good evidence, as-he 
worked wiuune In thesummer and fall of 1S7S. The 
later acceptance by Prof. Thomas complicated 
matters and led to coslderable correspondence 
(For continuation soo paws 12 a.) 
