This reply was published in full in the _Daily Telegraph_, and it looked to Jumbo’s many new admirers as if there was no longer any possibility of saving Jumbo for England. And the enthusiasm for Jumbo increased every day. Four thousand six hundred and twenty-six curious and sorrowing persons on a certain Wednesday in March, 1882, visited Jumbo, as against 214 for the corresponding Wednesday of the previous year. London _Fun_ suggested that the British coat of arms should be altered by the removal of the lion and the substitution of Jumbo, the motto reading, “Dieu et Mon Jumbo.” James Russell Lowell, American ambassador to the Court of St. James’s, remarked in a public speech that “the only burning question between the two nations is Jumbo.” But the English did not give up hope of retaining their favorite. Some of the fellows of the Royal Zoölogical Society brought an action in chancery for an injunction against the removal of Jumbo. The fellows contended that the council of the Society had no power under its charter to sell any animal, and they declared it as their opinion that “it must be morally wrong for the Council to sell a dangerous animal, and as a consequence whenever an animal cannot be safely retained in the gardens it ought to be killed.” “The Society is felt to be established for the promotion of science, and not for the purposes of trade,” wrote one of the fellows to the _Times_. This suit in chancery caused considerable comment in the _Times_. Sir George Bowyer, Fellow of the Royal Zoölogical Society, wrote that the British Museum had the power to dispose of duplicates and useless books, but if its trustees were to sell the Codex Alexandrinus, or some similar rare volume, a court would intervene. The Society, in the sale of Jumbo, said Sir George, had disposed of its most valuable and rarest item. There was only one elephant in the world known to be larger, and he belonged to a maharajah of India. Sir George refused to believe that the animal was in the dangerous state of “must,” a term used to designate elephants with tempers, and refused to admit that if he was he should be removed. This letter brought one from Major-General William Agnew, who said that his thirty-four years’ experience in Assam, “where elephants abound,” qualified him to say that an elephant in a state of “must” was an elephant to be removed from public gardens. “Among the elephants I myself owned at different times when magistrate of Goalpara was a male which became ‘must,’ and after attacking and almost killing its keeper broke from its stable, and for four days defied all my efforts for its recapture, which was only effected by the help of a party of elephant hunters who happened to pass through the station at the time in question.... I should like to be allowed to say one word more, which is that it behoves those in authority to see to the safety of Jumbo’s fellow-travelers on his voyage to America--at least, if he is to be