6. My earlier stab at explaining Henry's reversal was in Nathan Reingold and Marc
Rothenberg, "The Exploring Expedition and the Smithsonian Institution,"
Magnificent Voyagers: The U.S. Exploring Expedition, 1838-1842, ed. Herman J.
Viola and Carolyn Margolis (Washington, 1985), pp. 243-253. Orosz summarized other
efforts and offered his explanation in "Disloyalty," pp. 25-33. His interpretation was
attacked by S. Dillon Ripley and Wilcomb E. Washburn in "The Development of the National
Museum at the Smithsonian Institution, 1846-1855: A Response to Joel J. Orosz's
Article," Museum Studies Journal, 2 (Spring-Summer 1987): 6-11;
Orosz responded in "In Defense of the Deal: A Rebuttal to S. Dillon Ripley's and Wilcomb Washburn's
'Response.'" Museum Studies Journal 3 (Fall-Winter 1987): 7-12.
Unless otherwise noted, the information for the following discussion comes from documents
to be printed in The Papers of Joseph Henry, vol. 9.
[Return to text.]
7. See Douglas E. Evelyn, "The National Gallery at the Patent Office," Magnificent
Voyagers: The U.S. Exploring Expedition, 1838-1842, ed. Herman J. Viola and Carolyn
Margolis (Washington, 1985), p. 240.
[Return to text.]
8. William J. Rhees, editor, The Smithsonian Institution: Journals of the Board of Regents,
Reports of Committees, Statistics, Etc., 1879, Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections,
vol. 18 (Washington, 1880), p. 125.
[Return to text.]