Reply to Mr. Theo. D. Rand's paper, entitled “Notes on the geology of Chester Valley and vicinity, in the Proceedings Academy Natural Sciences, November, 1883
- Publisher
- Elsevier Science
- Year
- 1884
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 438 KB
- Volume
- 117
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0016-0032
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Rep[ff lo J~5.. T. ]9. I~and's Paper. 303 REPLY TO MR. THEO. D. RAiND'S PAPER, ENTITLED ~ N()TES ()N THE GEOLOGY OF CHESTER VALLEY A.~D VICI~'ITY~ IN TIIE PROCEEDINGS ACADE~IY :NATURAL SCII~NCES, ~'OVEMBER, 1883, ]'PREFATOI~Y 1NOWE.--In the American Naturalist of May, 1883, the writer reviewed a publicati(m of the Minerah)gical and Geological Section, marked "No. 2, 1880-1881." The only articles in this publication of any length or importance were by the Director, Sir. T. D. Rand.
Both of these were Hminly devoted to criticizing the work of Mr. Cha~s. :E. Hall, formerly an Assist:allt oil the Second Geological Survey of Pennsylvania. While mahy of the criticisms nmy have been well founded, it seemed to the present writer that the tone of the criticism was unjust, and the implied charge of incoml)eteney , unfounded. As Mr. Hall was absent from tim city, and unable, therefore, to undertake his own defenee, the writer reolied for his former colleague, from whose views, however, he differed widely, in the American Naturalist of May, 1883. Mr. Rand rejoined in September of the same year, raising, among other questions, that of the accuracy of one of my d~tes, which was therefore established on the authority of the Secretary of the :Board, 51It. Forman, in a short note in the same publication in October.
In the meantime, in the September numbur of the FRA._NKLIN INSTITUTE JOUICNAL, ):Jr. Rand had criticised, with considerable severity, over his wellknown i,fitials, the volume C, which had recently appeared. This led to an answer by me in the October number of the JOURNAL.
Mr. Rand then, under the title of "Notes ou Chester Valley and Vicinity," read a paper strongly combating views which had been, in various places, expressed by or ascribed to me. I had not expected this, though I was accidentally present at the meeting, and replied orally to the points ti~at I happened to recall. 5It. lCand was kind enough to allow me to see his manuscript, in which I found some expressions which I did not remember to have heard.'* M:y reply to this paper, written with the manuscript before me, was subnfitted to the Mineralogical and Geological Section for publication wilh Mr. Rand's paper, and was not published by that committee, but referred to the Publication Committee of the Academy itself. This committee accepted it, provided three passages marked by the committee were omitted. In the following, these passages are italicized. I considered them of trifling importance, but could not acknowledge the justice of the committee's demand, and withdrew the paper.
The second of these three passages concerned the present writer alone, and, as he did not feel too badly about it, he was at a loss to comprehend the vicarious sensibility of the committee.--P. F.] * I was absent for a few mlnutes during tt~e reading of Mr. Rand's paper, for tile purpose of getting from the library one of the volumes criticized.