IS THE BODY A PETRIFACTION?
"The majority of visitors disagree with the opinion of Dr. Boynton, that the figure is a statue, and pronounce it a petrified man. It is claimed that no sculptor would have invented such an unheard of position and design for a statue. No sculptor could have so perfectly imitated nature, especially in the minutiae which render the image such a wonder. It is claimed by the stone cutters and quarrymen who are constantly engaged in cutting the Onondaga County stone, that no single block could have been found of sufficient size, without a seam, from which to have chiseled out such a monster, (they claiming that the seam would have caused any such statue to split and fall apart under the necessary concussions required for cutting it to anything like its perfection in form.)
Other persons argue that no model of such a human being would have been likely to have been presented to any of the Indian or other inhabitants of America, within the past few centuries.
Many also ask for what reason should such an immense and expensive statue be hewn out and placed in so unfrequented a part of the country? How could it have been transported from the region of rocks to its present location, in a swamp entirely free from stones) especially since it is completely without any base or support of stone on which it can rest." "No statue is known to have been constructed," say the petrified advocates, "in reclining posture, unless the artist left some portion of the block of stone upon which the figure should rest, and be supported and strengthened for a durability of ages."
Other incidental suggestions are set forth as follows, by a writer in the Syracuse Daily Standard. "
The probabilities of its being a petrifaction have a better foundation, independent of outward appearances. First, is the fact that within a very short time, in the work of grading on section six of the Cazenovia & Canastota R.R., the skeletons of five mammoth human beings were exhumed, one of them eleven feet tall. The point of exhumation is not twenty miles distant from Cardiff. There are proofs of a giant race on this continent, and in this part of it; how far back, no one can tell. Second—There is now in the possession of the Onondaga Historical Association, a fish near one foot long, petrified to a perfect stone solidity, which was found near Cardiff, and the color of this petrified fish is very similar to the Cardiff giant stone. Mr. W.B. Kirk, of this city, when living at Cardiff many years ago, found near there a good sized Perch, that was perfectly petrified. Third—Five miles further down the valley, at what is known as the Onondaga Valley Cemetery, in taking up a human body for removal some years ago, it was found to be solid stone; still further north, but in the same range, the corpse of a child, on being taken up was found to be petrified—solid stone.—Still another case—the body of a man who had been buried a few years was taken up for removal, and being found a perfect petrifaction, the widow had it taken home, and it is yet retained in the house, and has never been reburied. We might give names, but do not feel at liberty to do so without first consulting family friends or relatives. These, and other samples that might be given, prove that petrification is not uncommon in the vicinity of Cardiff, where our ten feet two and a half inches, and well proportioned, giant was found."
A different statement still is made by Mr. Wright, father-in-law of Mr. Newell, who formerly owned Mr. Newell's present farm. Mr. Wright says that within a short distance of the present discovery, there is a spring of water which will within a few months turn into solid stone any small deposits of sand and gravel. Neighbors corroborate the statement. A wag has suggested that a factory be at once established there and petrified dogs, cats and small fry generally be furnished to order.
The unsettled point of what it is, undoubtedly furnishes an additional attraction regarding the mysterious stranger, as every person wishes to see for himself and become judge in the trial of Statue versus Fossil.
In this connection an interesting letter is subjoined from the Hon.
George Geddes.
To the Editor of the Syracuse Standard:—I find a notice in your paper of this morning of the "Stone Giant" at Cardiff, in which the fact that I visited it yesterday is stated, with the remark that you are told that I believe it to be a petrifaction. Allow me room in your paper to say that this is stating my views a little stronger than I desire. I have formed no opinion as to the origin of this wonderful thing. I was not allowed to make an examination of it beyond the privilege of looking from over a railing into the pit where the giant lay, and this pit was shaded by a tent, and the railing surrounded by double and triple rows of people, all anxious to see. I do not complain that I was not allowed a more perfect examination; there were too many to see to allow the descent into the pit of any one. All questions by me of the gentlemen in charge were politely answered. My impressions were decided that I saw before and below me the figure of a giant in stone of some kind, but what kind I could not tell for in that light and position it did not resemble any rock that our system has in it. I thought it was quite unlike our limestone or our gypsum formations; and that if it was sulphate of lime, and the work of human hands, that it was more likely to have been built up, than hewn from a solid rock. But as I have said, I had no means or liberty to make a close examination. I wish to say in addition, that I have traveled far and spent much money to see things of not one-tenth the interest that this stone giant was to me, and thought I had made good use of time and money.
Respectfully yours,
GEORGE GEDDES.
Oct. 20th, 1869.