Hutton according to MacCnlloch. 265 



as often as the reverse ; proving, that reasoning was, in any 

 case, a very doubtful cause of its successful application. If I 

 am to do justice to my readers, I am bound to protect them 

 from the assertion that he always proceeded on the legitimate 

 principles of induction ; for thus, under reputed authority, is 

 the young mind misled. 



There is an equally unfortunate anxiety after the hypothesis, 

 where the present forms of the surface are concerned ; since ever 

 thinking of the slow action of feeble forces, he forgets that 

 elevations must have produced inequalities, and therefore, that 

 valleys must have existed before rivers. To deny, also, any 

 other alluvia than those of rivers, is not only to deny palpable 

 facts, but to overlook some necessary consequences of the very 

 theory ; while if we can pardon the zeal of the original theorist, 

 there is no excuse for the commentator. The system which 

 assumes to be perfect, and whose pride will not yield, mistakes 

 its own interests. It is beaten at the bad outposts, which it is 

 resolved to defend ; while, by retiring to the citadel, it might 

 long have defied assault. 



Such is a sufficient view of this theory, and such is all the 

 criticism which appeared due to the student in geology, while 

 I desire to avoid what is superfluous. It is sufficient, among 

 other things, to prove that this boasted theory is little more 

 than an hypothesis, where it is original ; yet fortunate in havino- 

 borrowed a better foundation, and thus far almost only a 

 theory. Yet, wishing to do justice to all, I must point out 

 that which I believe to be original, or if not always original, 

 important. Such is the effects of pressure, but original as to 

 the carbonate of lime only ; and such is the igneous origin of 

 granite, since without that, there can be no theory of the earth ; 

 though it may be questioned how far the hint was taken from 

 Leibnitz and Buffon, as it is to believe that Lazzaro Moro would 

 have come to the same conclusion, had he known this rock. 

 Let Hutton, however, have the merit, though furnished by his 

 predecessors with all the analogous proofs in trap and in volca- 

 nic rocks. Yet, on the former, I must repeat, that his confu- 

 sion, added to his antipathy respecting their truly, if remote, 

 volcanic nature in many places, must make us doubt those 

 powers of philosophical generalization, for which he lias been so 



JULY SEPTEMBER 183]. S 



