362 Darwin and Geology 



they must have done, if they were to be tilted, convoluted, or over- 

 turned by gradual small shoves. He never, however, explained his 

 theory of original flexibility, and therefore I am as unable as ever to 

 comprehend why flexibility is a quality so limited in time. 



"Phillips then got up and pronounced a panegyric upon the 

 Principles of Geology, and although he still differed, thought the 

 actual cause doctrine had been so well put, that it had advanced the 

 science and formed a date or era, and that for centuries the two 

 opposite doctrines would divide geologists, some contending for 

 greater pristine forces, others satisfied, like Lyell and Darwin, with 

 the same intensity as nature now employs. 



"Fitton quizzed Phillips a little for the warmth of his eulogy, 

 saying that he [Fitton] and others, who had Mr Lyell always with 

 them, were in the habit of admiring and quarrelling with him every 

 day, as one might do with a sister or cousin, whom one would only 

 kiss and embrace fervently after a long absence. This seemed to be 

 Mr Phillips' case, coming up occasionally from the provinces. Fitton 

 then finished this drollery by charging me with not having done 

 justice to Hutton, who he said was for gradual elevation. 



"I replied, that most of the critics had attacked me for overrating 

 Hutton, and that Playfair understood him as I did. 



"Whewell concluded by considering Hopkins' mathematical calcu- 

 lations, to which Darwin had often referred. He also said that we 

 ought not to try and make out what Hutton would have taught and 

 thought, if he had known the facts which we now know." 



It may be necessary to point out, in explanation of the above 

 narrative, that while it was perfectly clear from Button's rather 

 obscure and involved writings that he advocated slow and gradual 

 change on the earth's surface, his frequent references to violent action 

 and earthquakes led many including Playfair, Lyell and Whewell 

 to believe that he held the changes going on in the earth's interior to 

 be of a catastrophic nature. Fitton, however, maintained that Hutton 

 was consistently uniformitarian. Before the idea of the actual 

 "flowing" of solid bodies under intense pressure had been grasped 

 by geologists, De la Beche, like Playfair before him, maintained that 

 the bending and folding of rocks must have been effected before their 

 complete consolidation. 



In concluding his account of this memorable discussion, Lyell 

 adds : " I was much struck witli the different tone in which my 

 gradual causes was treated by all, even including De la Beche, from 

 that which they experienced in the same room four years ago, when 

 Buckland, De la Beche (?), Sedgwick, Whewell, and some others 

 treated them with as much ridicule as was consistent with politeness 

 in my presence." 



