350 ILLOGICAL GEOLOGY. 



1ms year after year shown the small value of negative facts. 

 The conviction that there arc no traces of higher organisms 

 in earlier strata, has resulted not from the absence of such 

 remains, but from incomplete examination. At p. 400 of 

 his l\r&amp;lt;inu(il of Elementary Geology^ Sir Charles Lycll 

 gives a list in illustration of this. It appears that in 1709, 

 lishc.s were not known lower than the Permian system. In 

 1793 they were found in the subjacent Carboniferous sys 

 tem ; in 1S28 in the Devonian ; in IS 10 in the Upper Silu 

 rian. Of reptiles, we read that in 1710 the lowest known 

 were in the Permian; in IS 11 they were detected in the 

 Carboniferous; and in Is.VJ in the Upper Devonian. 

 &quot;While of the Mammalia the list shows that in 1798 none 

 had been discovered below the middle Koccne; but that in 

 1818 they were discovered in the Lower Oolite; and in 

 1 817 in the Upper Trias. 



The fact is, however, that both parties set out with an 

 inadmissible postulate. Of the Unitbrmitarians, not only 

 such writers as Hugh Miller, but also such as Sir Charles 

 Lycll,* reason as though we had found the earliest, or some 

 thing like the earliest, strata. Their antagonists, whether 

 defV iidcrs of the Development Hypothesis or simply Pro 

 gressionists, almost uniformly do the like. Sir II. Murchi- 

 son, who is a Progressionist, calls the lowest fossilifcrous 

 strata, &quot; Protozoic.&quot; Prof. Ansted uses the same term. 

 Whether avowedly or not, all the disputants stand on this 

 assumption as their common ground. 



Yet is this assumption indefensible, as some who make 

 t very well know. Facts may be cited against it which 

 .-how that jt is a more than questionable one that it is a 

 highly improbable one ; while the evidence assigned in its 

 favour will not bear criticism. 



* Sir Charles Lyoll is no longer to bo classed among Uniformitarians. 

 With rare and admirable candour nc has, since this was written, yielded 

 U&amp;gt; the arguments of Mr. Darwin. 



