56 ON INCREDULITY WITH RESPECT TO GEOLOGICAL FACTS. 
As regards the explanation given by them of the appearance 
of fossil shells and skeletons—that they were so created —I would 
say very little in deference to the common sense of the true en- 
quirers, since they would themselves demolish it. A skeleton 
found on the snowy sides of the Alps, or in a chasm at the foot of 
the Andes, is at once said to be that of some living being: if we 
find one embedded in stone, why may we not draw the same con- 
clusion ? In fact, not to be allowed to draw it, as I heard a friend 
say once, is to attribute to the Creator an intention to lead us 
astray by the right use of our faculties. 
But I will take one of the very first assertions of Geology, the 
formation of our hills under water—-the statement, for instance, 
that the hills on which we ramble were once under the sea—they 
were in fact constructed there—there was a period of time when 
they did not exist, although the other parts of the earth did. To 
the sceptic in Geology this is tantamount to denying the truth of 
the Bible—an deal Bible, mind, not the one we commonly under- 
stand as the Bible. ‘‘ What,” he says, ‘‘do you mean to say that 
the earth was formed piecemeal ?—that these Wycombe hills were 
put here after the other part was finished ? Absurd.” ‘‘ Gently,” 
we reply, ‘‘don’t be so hasty in drawing conclusions ; the hills 
were not put here ; you do not understand the groundwork of the 
science; let us give you a few illustrations. Have you ever 
noticed the little channels by the side of the road after a heavy 
shower of rain? Have you seen how the sweep of the water has 
laid the sand in streaks, how the materials are assorted according 
to their gravity, the rubbish in one place, the heavier pebbles in 
another? Have you noticed how, where the action of the water 
was most violent, the bed of the channel is waved and ridged with 
regular layers of sand? Should you have any hesitation in 
ascribing all this to aqueous force, even if you were not informed 
that such was the case? And if you saw on the sand an impres- 
sion resembling a bird’s foot, would you not say at once that a bird 
had walked over it? Now we find all these appearances in our 
geological excursions—we split open a slab of stone and find its 
surface in waves and ridges exactly like those we saw in the 
