292 Dr. Fleming o?t a [Apmix, 



state, that the scene, situate hut a hw hundred yards from my 

 dwelling, has been examined repeatedly, and under different 

 circumstances, and several friends who have visited the spot, 

 have appeared satisfied of the accuracy of my conclusions. I 

 may mention the names of two of these, Mr. Neill and Mr. Bald, 

 both members of this Society, and well qualified, by habits of 

 observation, to form a correct opinion on the subject. Many 

 of these trunks and roots occur from eight to ten feet below high 

 water-mark. 



If we assume, therefore, that the roots of these trees are in 

 their natural position, with respect to the bed which now sup- 

 ports them, are we warranted to conclude that they grew on a 

 surface ten feet lower than the high water-mark, but before that 

 surface was exposed to the periodical inundations of the tide ? 

 Every cavity, in this climate, situate at a lower level than that of 

 the sea, is invariably filled with water, and in a condition hostile 

 to the growth of trees, until its surface has been elevated, by the 

 washing in of mud, or the growth of peat, to a position at least 

 equal to the ordinary rise of the tide. Since these trees could 

 not, therefore, have grown in an inland valley so far below the 

 rise of the tide, even where the sea was excluded, we must draw 

 the conclusion that the surface on which these trees grew, was, 

 at the period of their growth, at least ten feet higher, in relation 

 to the sea, than at present ; and to account for this remarkable 

 change, we must adopt one of the following suppositions : — 

 Either that the sea has risen ten feet, and overflowed that sur- 

 face which was formerly beyond its reach ; or, that the ground 

 supporting these trees has sunk to the same extent. 



The first of these suppositions, viz. a permanent rising of the 

 sea, has not been resorted to by a»y of those writers whom we 

 have had an opportunity of consulting. Indeed it is contrary to 

 those known laws which regulate the movements of the ocean, 

 and receives no support from any circumstances which have 

 been observed on the maritime shores of this country. 



If, then, we abandon the idea that the sea has gained an 

 elevation of its level, and adopt the other supposition, viz. that 

 the peat-bed has sunk, so as now to be ten feet lower than when 

 the trees grew upon its surface, we advance a step nearer the 

 object at which we aim. It still remains, however, to be deter- 

 mined, what those causes were, which operated in depressing 

 the surface of this bed, and enabling the waves to pass over that 

 soil which was formerly so much beyond their influence, as to 

 be fit for the support of the hazel and the birch tree. 



The first method of explaining the phenomenon likely to pre- 

 sent itself, especially where the bed is limited in extent, is by 

 supposing that the substratum, having lost its adhesion to the 

 bed on which it rested, by the percolation of water, and the 

 exposure of the side next the sea, moved down an inclined 

 plane into deep water, carrying along with it the upper layer 



