LAMARCK’S WORK IN GEOLOGY erg 
by displacing and again bringing together the mole- 
cules composing them, so that, undergoing a new 
aggregation, these calcareous molecules obtained a 
number of points of contact, and constituted harder 
and more compact masses. It finally results that 
instead of the original masses of madrepores and 
millepores there occurs only masses of a compact 
calcareous rock, which modern mineralogists have 
improperly called przmzteve limestone, because, seeing 
in it no traces of shells or corals, they have mistaken 
these stony masses for deposits of a matter primi- 
tively existing in nature.” 
He then reiterates the view that these deposits 
of marble and limestones, often forming mountain 
ranges, could not have been the result of a universal 
catastrophe, and in a very modern way goes on to 
specify what the limits of catastrophism are. The 
only catastrophes which a naturalist can reasonably 
admit as having taken place are partial or local ones, 
those dependent on causes acting in isolated places, 
such as the disturbances which are caused by vol- 
canic eruptions, by earthquakes, by local inundations, 
by violent storms, etc. These catastrophes are with 
reason admissible, because we observe their analogues, 
and because we know that they often happen. He 
then gives examples of localities along the coast of 
France, as at Manche, where there are ranges of high 
hills made up of limestones containing Gryphee, 
ammonites, and other deep-water shells. 
In the conclusion of the chapter, after stating that 
the ocean has repeatedly covered the greater part of 
the earth, he then claims that “the displacement 
of the sea, producing a constantly variable inequality 
