242 Uajr Smtt0rts, (Essmrs, anb |IWwtos. [xi. 



which a ruined constitution may be repaired," he fore- 

 stalls Hutton ; while, on the other hand, Kant is true to 

 science. He knows no bounds to geological speculation 

 but those of the intellect. He reasons back to a begin- 

 ning of the present state of things ; he admits the possi- 

 bility of an end. 



I have said that the three schools of geological specu- 

 lation which I have termed Catastrophism, Uniformi- 

 tarianism, and Evolutionism .are commonly supposed to 

 be antagonistic to one another ; and I presume it will 

 have become obvious that, in my belief, the last is 

 destined to swallow up the other two. But it is proper 

 to remark that each of the latter has kept alive the tra- 

 dition of precious truths. 



CATASTROPHISM has insisted upon the existence of a 

 practically unlimited bank of force, on which the theorist 

 might draw; and it has cherished the idea of the de- 

 velopment of the earth from a state in which its form, 

 and the forces which it exerted, were very different from 

 those we now know. That such difference of form and 

 power once existed is a necessary part of the doctrine of 

 evolution. 



UNIFORMITAEIANISM, on the other hand, has with 

 equal justice insisted upon a practically unlimited bank 

 of time, ready to discount any quantity of hypothetical 

 paper. It has kept before our eyes the power of the 

 infinitely little, time being granted, and has compelled us 

 to exhaust known causes, before flying to the unknown. 

 1 - To my mind there appears to be no sort of necessary 

 theoretical antagonism between Catastrophism and Uni- 

 forimtarianisni. On the contrary, it is very conceivable 

 that catastrophes may be part and parcel of uniformity. 

 Let me illustrate my case by analogy. The working of 

 a clock is a model of uniform action ; good time-keeping 

 means uniformity of action. But the striking of the 



