Morning journal and courier., 1890-01-21
TIE mAn.H-oorE CONTROVERSY.

rME MARsH.COPE CONTROvERsY.
Professor Cope Denies she Charges OF
she Yale Professor ana Dlscharges
VOlley I'm Return - The Horse Gene
olexy Mastsr-The LixaFa story, Etc.
Professor Cope vigorously replies in yester-
jays Herald to Professor Narsh's response in
The Herald of the day previous. Professor
Cope rehearses his original charges categoris
cally and alleges that Professor Marsh has
failed to refute them. The Cope allegations
Major Powell Cope claims are ''all
admitted and proven by unimpeachable tes-
timony." So he turns his attention to Pro-
lessor Marsh's published statement. Cope
reiterates the charge Of plagiarism against
Professor Marsh and adds:
by q man as his own Information derived from
ohsr orally Or IN wrprg Is one KIM Tn,s
scientific works Direct copying Or 70 writing from
memory Of work already published by others is
saOsa Kind ns hssa H4 ns
evesky, and tho tAxonomy Of the hoofed mammalia,
taken from my york By Marsh.
structlve plagiarism, when q man utterly neglects
work done BY others previously and claims 1T as
tific men make no distinction between the two, as
1t ID impossible to know what an author may or
may not have read And y Is safe to cal such 49,,
delinquent author does not come out and acknowl-
edge the claims Of others which he has ignored.
long list Of his appropriations in this direction Of
which win produce a few specimens.
Then Cope states that Immediately after he
had read paper ON neutrality-suspicious. be-
E.. Ill >k v<1E0 ofa D~oG
Marsh suddenly disappeared and in few
days came to the front with q similar paper
on the same subject, Sin which some Of the
same discoveries were reoited without credit,
but with changed names. As had previ-
ously fortified myself by publication in the
American Naturalist, this attempted plsgia-
rism fell fat"
Prof. Cope further alleges:
I'm Marsh on na The iurassic
Tapped and ignored and new names given in such
IN M.r.hs williston and work on Gre
taceous saurians the same thing is done. nearly all
the leading geneIa being renamed n. d;n.o.r.+.
the systematic classification is absurd and consists
mainly in the attempt to substitute his own names
on the ssurans og the LARAMIE the same is
pursued. Work of from twelve to fifteen years is
ignored and new names imposed on everything. In
the work on the Laramie mammals the same course
pursued where there Is any contact with the work
OF others
Then Prof. Cope takes up the horse genoa
logy questions, and adds:
"Marsh's paper was printed In 1874 and
| had not seen Kowalewski's paper. That is
quite possible. Professor Marsh never sees
previous papers that come within the range
Of what he has his assistants to write for
him.
"But the facts were not unknown to him.
They were referred to in English by Profess
sor Flower in q lecture before the Royal In
stitution Of Great Britain, before Kowalews.
ki's book was out. early in 1873, and he
quotes the well-known paper of Professor
Huxley of 1870, 'On the Pedigree of the
| Horse where the material facts are set forth
with Professor Huxley's accustomed ability.
Three authors had already stated the main
features of this discovery before Marah.
"But this is not all. Professor Marsh
| by Professors Huxley and Kowa1ewski three
alleged new ones, which he called 'Orohip-
pus,' 'Miohippus' and 'Pliohippus.' He
afterward added fourth, to precede 'Oro-
hippus,' which he called 'Eohippus.' AL
though II 10 sixteen years since the first
three names were proposed nobody knows
what they are, and they have been finally, in
the latest European works, relegated to the
limbo of useless rubbish.
cit is generally supposed that 'Eohippus'
and 'Orohippus' are new names for the
'Hyracotherium' of Owen. published in
1841, and which occupies the place Marsh
ascribes to these names. His 'Pliohippus'
is probably the 'Hippiolium' of Owen, pub
lished many years before. As to 'Miohip.
pus' no one knows certainly what it is, for
the description, like those Of the others, is
unacceptable, but 1t is generally supposed
to be . duplication of the .Anehitherium'
of Meyer, Of 1874. one of the four stages
mentioned by Huxley and Kowalewski.
'Thus 1t 10 clear that Professor Marsh'e
record on the horse question ia in bad shape.
What In true in 1t IL not new, and what il
new IL not true. And this Ia one of the
things which Professor Osborn says have
been common knowledge among scientific
men for several years."
| Professor Narsh's course 10 simply fatu-
ous; for the truth comes ont at last, and in
deed already Professor Marsh's work ia re-
ceiving the just verdict of scientific Ger
many. We see NO more In their latest text
books of 'Orohippus, Miohippus, Pilohippas,
etc., but the work of the real authors is rec
ogpized. Major Powell and tho American
public do not read German scientific books
and they are deceived just the same. Pro-
lessor Marsh draws his fat salary and pub
| IL suppressed and an attempt made to con.
fscate property obtained by private expsndi.
ture.
at may as well state here. however, that
| In the papers written by Professor Marsh's
assistants and published as his own from
been added to paleontologio science. The
facts which have already related are not OF
the nature of personal grievances, as can be
| readily seen. I have nothing to gain in
| making the charges"
Prof. Cope admits that he il human and
became wrath at Prof. Marsh's "persisteni
charges of depredations." He excuses his
alleged surreptitious visits to the Yale Mu
scum and alleges that he did not make any
unfair use Of such information as he chanced
to get while in the building, and says that
| "Prof. Narsh's excitement over the event
amused everybody. including sundiy Yale
professors"
Prof. Cope makes light Of the charge that
he committed "depredations" at the British
Museum, and treats what he did there a. o!
trivial character and OF . nature permitted
to scientists. He denies. - false, the charge
Of theft of some of Prof. Mareh's materials
and says these charges were found to b.
false by Q committee of the Academy Of
Science to whom they were submitted.
Cope cries "Psccavi" to Professor Aarsh'l
lizard story concerning him and says:
"ro the charge Of turning . lizard without .
Gent story. sncs i sonpsis me to bring into prom
thin
and worse was able TO correct part Of the erro
should have done. In . very. short time my prede
cesssr saw the error he and I had committed ant
corrected Il in print without previously informing
After again asserting that Professor Narst
did CONSTRUCT the Princeton expedition" ani
denying the charge that he miscalled . bird
"reptile," Professor Cope asserts his prid'