264 Ilidton acco7-ding to MacCtdloch. 



forms of the earth ; namely that whicli anteceded the primary 

 strata, that which included these alone, and the present one; 

 though arguing for its past eternity, as it does for a future re- 

 novation, and to all eternity. In this simple view, this system 

 possesses an aspect which its author will soon injure by his de- 

 tails. With exception of the theory of trap-rocks and volcanoes, 

 he had borrowed well, and safely extended, what he had borrow- 

 ed, but, with the usual ambition to erect an entire theory, 

 though^ignorant of the necessary facts and sciences, he has, in 

 almost all else, levelled himself to the Werners ; while his com- 

 mentator has, unluckily for his fame, pursued the same course. 

 In arguing against subsidences, we trace equally the spirit of 

 hypothesis and antagonism, with a want of both geological know- 

 ledge and sound reasoning. Of some structure of discontinuity, if 

 not strictly cavernous, there is evidence in the lineal directions of 

 volcanoes; as coal, and more, are proofs of subsidences. Though 

 gneiss, and some other primary strata, are in their present condi- 

 tionfrom heat, this mode of consolidation cannot be admittedfor all 

 strata. The theory of trap is untrue, because injudiciously rigid ; 

 while the anxiety of opposition has introduced inextricable confu- 

 sion into this part of the system ; under which also he has, by dis- 

 claiming demonstrated truths, forfeited one of his strongest sup- 

 ports, while maintaining a perpetual hostility against Dolomieu 

 and Faujas de St Fond, on the very facts by which he might 

 have profited, but did not understand. Knowing the igneous 

 rocks most imperfectly, he denies the existence of scoriform 

 traps, while having recourse to a most imhappy expedient for 

 explaining the amygdaloidal nodules. Perpetually indeed mis- 

 applying a favourite principle, even though admitting water to 

 a large share in his operations, it is called on where neither 

 needful to the theory, nor reconcileable to the facts. Such is 

 the unnecessary fusion of carbonate of lime, with the igneous 

 origin of quartz, chalcedony and silicified wood ; while the theory 

 of flints is peculiarly infelicitous and unintcUigible, as is that of 

 the septaria. But the whole theory of igneous secretion is with- 

 out excuse ; as it compels us to deny that this writer was the 

 chemist he has been called. The theory of coals equals the 

 very worst of the schemes of Werner ; while it indicated that 

 narrow spirit of hypothesis which misapplies a sound principle 



