(-» ) 



tiuit the uppei' pieco, willi i-osjipct lo (Ii(> lowor one, luis lieoii pushed 

 oil l^/,^ ('in. ill soiitli-caskM'lv dircclioii. So lliis is ;i t;u'l ! The aiitlioi' 

 ho\vev(M- bases lhei'eu|)Oii (he liypolhesis (hal Ihc ice motion lias taken 

 plaee, ns <i triiolc, not fVoni N.K. to .S.W., such as is still «^enerallv 

 admitted, but tVom N.W. to S.E., in such a wav that the startiii"- 

 point is not to be songhl for in Scandinavia but in Scotland. Now 

 it appears to me that here is a strong dis|)i'opoi'tion between the 

 importance of the observed fact and that of the hypothesis." 



Fnrther, at the end, lie says : 



"So to lind the explication ot the shifting' of the (|nart/Jte boulder 

 at Eksloo, o\'er a distance of one cmtimetc.r and a half, we haxe not 

 to admit Scotland as starting point for the ice motion, but can |)ersisf 

 ill onr ohl opinion." 



Thus far Dr. Lorie. 



Now I wish to remind those who take an interest in the matter 

 that it was by no means that one fact, referred to by Dr. IjOkik, 

 on which I based "the liyj)0thesis" that the ice motion "took place" 

 from N.W. to S.E., nor did I assert at all that the starting point 

 of the ice motion is not to be sought for in Scandinavia but in 

 Scotland. In the quoted Proceedings, to which Dr. Lorie refers, I do 

 not S[)eak of a liypotlirsis, but of a supposition, and this, clearly, is 

 based u])on the whole consideration of the structure and the origin 

 of the Hondsrug ridge. Particularly this supposition is related to 

 2\/.^ |)ages of my communication, (the whole text being 10 pages), 

 viz. from \). 99 (in the middle) to p. 101 (below). The only sentence 

 bringing in relation the fact of the shifting of the pieces of the quarlzite 

 boulder, with respect to each other, to the direction of the ice motion, 

 (p. 100, at the end of the second alinea), occurs half wa\ the 

 explanation of "27.2 P^ges and runs as follows: "Now with this 

 supposition perfectly agrees the at tirst sight jiaradoxical direction of 

 motion as deri\ed from the shifted boulder of quartzite." 



And concerning the starting point of the ice motion, on p. 101 

 of the Proceedings 1 most unhesitatingly admit Scandinavia lo be 

 the starting point of the ice motion, whereas I only speak of the 

 possihiHtii ("it might be possible, at least") of a deviation of the 

 Scandinavian ice stream in south-easterly directi(»n, caused bv the 

 Scottish ice stream. 



It will be su|)ertlnous to argue that the distance over which (he 

 tw(» pieces of the (piai-tzite boulder are separated fr(tm one another 

 /// the .soil ((ugh( not to be in any proportion to (he large motion 

 of the ice orn- it. 



Haarlem, May 26, 1904. 



