DEAR SIR--As everyone is deeply interested in the Onondaga Giant,
perhaps it may be as well for each of us to add his mite towards
guessing at the solution of the problem he has silently set us all.

It is no wonder that so many are of opinion that he is a gigantic
petrifaction. His proportions are so perfect, and his appearance
is so life like. I will add, that every one wants to think so.
If he proved to be a petrifaction, what a realm of awe and mysterious
conjecture would he open to us. But I, for one, feel convinced
that he will prove to be statue, and for these reasons:--

First, I think there are evident marks of stratification in the
stone. The left eyebrow and the top of the nose are the parts
most elevated. These correspond exactly, both being composed of
a white layer. On the chest is a squarish layer of a dark tinge;
around, and slightly below this, is another layer corresponding
exactly with the ins and outs of the first. Beyond, and below this,
another and another all alike, seeming to be simply lines of
stratification. The level seems exactly kept. Follow with your eye
any two adjacent lines, and you will see that where they are close
to each other the surface has an abrupt change of level; where
they are further apart the surface is nearly horizontal. Where
the surface approaches the perpendicular, as on the sides, the dark
line showing the separation of the strata is thin, because it has
been cut through nearly at right angles. Where the surface is more
horizontal the dark line is broader, because it has been cut
through obliquely, the breadth varying steadily with the angle of
inclination. The same can be plainly seen along the right leg.

Another strong reason for its being a statue lies in the fact that