There's a story _pour vous encourager_ if you are ever in a
like fix.

The other was his address at the opening of the John Hopkins
University at Baltimore in 1876. Late on the preceding afternoon he
returned very tired from an expedition to Washington, to find that a
formal dinner and reception awaited him in the evening. He snatched
an hour or two of rest, when a New York reporter arrived demanding the
text of the address, which had to be sent to New York for simultaneous
publication with the Baltimore papers. Now the address was not written
out; it was to be delivered from notes only. From these notes, then,
he delivered it _in extenso_ to the reporter, who took it down in
shorthand, and promised to let him have a copy to lecture from next
morning. But the fair copy did not come till the last moment. To his
horror he found this was written out upon "flimsy," from which it
would be impossible to read properly. Again he turned it down on the
desk and boldly trusted to memory. This second version was taken down
verbatim by the Baltimore reporters in their turn. What if it did not
tally with the New York version? As a matter of fact, it was
almost identical, save for a few curious discrepancies, apparent
contradictions between professed eye-witnesses which the ingenious
critic might perfectly well use to prove that both accounts were
fictitious, and that the pretended original was never delivered under
the conditions alleged.

Mention has been made of his lectures to working men. Of these his
assistant and successor, Professor G.B. Howes, wrote:--

Great as were his class lectures, his working-men's were