124 



NA TURE 



[Dec. 8, 1887 



they are ranged. Still, their value is independent of 

 the theories : for the author has dealt with them in 

 the spirit of an advocate, but of an honest advocate. 

 If, indeed, Mr. Howorth can be accused of any forensic 

 art, it is in this very pardonable respect — that the most is 

 made of the opinions of geologists who have held views 

 generally favourable to his own. Thus the unwary and 

 but slightly scientific reader almost trembles before such 

 a weight of authority, and is afraid to question an opinion 

 favoured by so many lights of the heroic age of geology. 

 But in citing authorities it must always be remembered that, 

 unless it can be shown that all the important facts on which an 

 induction is now founded were before them also, the value 

 of their opinion is greatly affected, and it may even be 

 comparatively small. Further, if satisfied on this point, 

 we must inquire whether any, and, if so, what, alternative 

 hypotheses had been presented to them. These pre- 

 liminary considerations are often overlooked in quoting 

 authorities, yet their importance cannot be disputed. The 

 mind is greatly influenced by early impressions and by the 

 hypotheses which it has accepted. In the multitude of 

 facts we to some extent find what we seek, miss those of 

 whose value we are ignorant, and without any conscious 

 unfairness select those things which support the accepted 

 view. Anyone who has had in the course of his life to 

 reconsider and to modify an induction formerly maintained 

 must be conscious that in this respect he has innocently 

 erred. Probably, only a cantankerous-minded investi- 

 gator wholly escapes this infirmity, and for him other 

 snares are laid. Hence in this matter the testimony of 

 even such men as Buckland, or Cuvier, or D'Archiac, is 

 of small value, because not only has a vast store of new 

 facts been acquired since their time, which have influenced 

 or modified almost every branch of geology, but also 

 because the widespread belief in a universal deluge and 

 the virulent attacks made on geology by well-meaning 

 but unthinking theologians had produced a natural readi- 

 ness to welcome everything which seemed to ha rmonize 

 with the Biblical narrative. 



Mr. Howorth urges that a catastrophic occurrence is 

 not excluded by a rational view of uniformitarianism — 

 which position, we imagine, few would dispute in the 

 abstract ; but issue would often be joined as to which 

 explanation were the more probable. He points out also 

 that it is quite possible for a particular form of a tradition 

 to be unhistorical, and yet for the tradition itself to have a 

 true foundation, a remark which is certainly just, and 

 which is sometimes forgotten. But, admitting these 

 axioms, the asserted occurrence of any particular cataclysm 

 is a question of evidence ; and it is not enough for Mr. 

 Howorth to show that his hypothesis explains some diffi- 

 culties which exist in the other, unless he further prove 

 that it is not only in accordance with a larger number of 

 facts, but also does not create a new class of difficulties 

 still more formidable. 



Mr. Howorth's preface sounds no uncertain note, as the 

 following extract will show : — 



" The coral-insect {sic) raises the islands of the 

 Pacific, and the fall of leaves in a tropical forest 

 piles up deep black soil. These cases are no doubt 

 cases of continuous change ; but if we turn elsewhere 

 we have to explain a very different state of things. 

 The great ga ing cliffs and sheer precipices of the 

 Alps, the splintered pyramids of the Sierra Nevada, 



the canons of Colorado, the huge dislocations of the 

 strata, involving faults of hundreds of fathoms in extent, 

 so near us as Durham. These have not the look of gradual 

 changes." 



We rub our eyes, and wonder whether the last fifty 

 years have been all a dream. Here are dead and gone 

 geological ideas in full vigour. We had thought that if 

 there was one spot on earth in which catastrophe could 

 not be invoked, where the uniformitarian could be in 

 peace, it was the Colorado canons ; and we cannot help 

 thinking that if Mr. Howortli were a member of the 

 English Alpine Club he would by this time have convinced 

 himself that, whatever signs of ruin the Alps may aftord, 

 there are none of any vast catastrophe. It is therefore 

 evident that Mr. Howorth's method of interpretation 

 differs from that of geologists in general, and this must 

 throughout the book be borne in mind by the reader- 

 But Mr, Howorth is always rather a special pleader, in- 

 genious sometimes, but generally inconclusive. Granting 

 that occasionally he contrives to give a smart rap to the 

 irrational uniformitarian (for such a person does exist) and 

 hits upon a defect in an hypothesis, he straightway goes on 

 to propose a solution involving greater difficulties. In 

 a brief notice it is impossible to deal with particular 

 instances, but some general indications may be given 

 The carcasses of mammoths are found embedded in ice. 

 in the north of Siberia. It is admitted that, from their 

 state of preservation, they must have been frozen up very 

 shortly after death, and have so remained ever since. 

 There are no doubt considerable difficulties in attributing 

 their transport to a river flood, as Mr. Howorth points 

 out ; nevertheless, when we remember the peculiarities of 

 the Siberian rivers, and that in a cold region a carcass 

 would be slow to decompose, for the flesa might freeze 

 before it ceased to drift, these do not seem insuperable. 

 Mr. Howorth, as an alternative, offers the hypothesis of 

 a deluge, followed by a sudden change of temperature, 

 but, apart from the difficulties attending the former part 

 of this, by what physical or astronomical catastrophe does 

 he account for the latter ? Wisely, he makes no attempt 

 to indicate this. 



Again, in speaking of the contents of caves, Mr. 

 Howorth constantly lays stress upon the indications of 

 the action of running waters, and upon the absence of 

 any such disturbing agent at the present time. But he 

 forgets that even followers of Lyell would admit that at 

 no very remote epoch the climate of England was different, 

 the rainfall was heavier, the streams were all bigger, nay, 

 that a cave itself is symptomatic of running water, which 

 in most cases would gradually forsake its old course. 

 The stream which made Clapham Cave still runs con- 

 cealed, hard at hand, through the limestone rock, and not 

 so long ago, after a downpour on Ingleborough, welled 

 up into its ancient channel. We wonder whether Mr. 

 Howorth has ever seen what the fall of 4 inches of 

 rain in a single night — no unprecedented case — can do 

 even in our English lowlands. Such a downfall would 

 turn many a dry fissure, small as its drainage-area might 

 be, into a running stream. Mr. Howorth, in combating 

 uniformitarians, seems to overlook the variations and 

 catastrophes on a small scale (compared with the bulk of 

 the earth) which everyone who has sat at the feet of 

 Lyell accepts as axiomatic. 



