Objections to Eozoon. 119 



sible. I sent with the note a tracing of the structures in 

 question from a specimen of m j own ; but, instead of engraving- 

 this, the Editor borrowed, as I suppose, the cut which had 

 appeared in Dr. Carpenter's paper, and which certainly repre- 

 sented structures of the same character. 



As to the relations of tlie canal-system to the tubuli, I can 

 only say that, after studying a very large number of slices and 

 other preparations of Eozoon^ and comparing these with Num- 

 onuh'na, Calcan'na, and other more modern forms, many of 

 them prepared and mounted with my own hands, I cannot 

 discover any greater diversity of structure than that which 

 might be expected in a gigantic Stromatoporoid form of so 

 great antiquity, and separated by so vast an interval of time 

 from any thing Avith which we can compare it. 



In any case Eozoon exists, and, projecting in Stromatopora- 

 like masses from the weathered outcrops of our Laurentian 

 limestones, so resembles certain well-known fossils that the 

 geologist cannot deny it attention, however its presence may 

 clash with any preconceived notions ; and I have yet to learn 

 that the laborious collection of such specimens, the preparation 

 and study of hundreds of slices, and the comparison of them 

 with the forms, recent and fossil, which they may be supposed 

 to resemble, can be fairly stigmatized as " wild speculation." 

 It is certainly a speculation which makes more demands on 

 time, muscle, and eyesight than some others that can be 

 mentioned ; and I only regret that I am unable adequately to 

 present to naturalists the materials, almost a museum in them- 

 selves, that have accumulated on my hands in the study of 

 this ancient fossil, and which have testified more and more 

 not only to its importance and wide distribution, but to its 

 organic nature. I am not a specialist in the study of the 

 Foraminifera any further than the Postpliocene species of 

 Canada and their successors in the Gulf of St. Lawrence are 

 concerned. The study of jBo.soo/i was forced on me by circum- 

 stances and by its evident geological significance, and has 

 been pursued as specimens ])resented themselves and as time 

 ])ermitted, but, I can honestly affirm, without any desire to 

 support any preconceived hypothesis or to further any current 

 speculation. On the one hand, T can plainly perceive the use 

 which may be made of it to favour theories of development 

 in w liicli 1 have no faith ; on the other, I can equally see its 

 inconsistency with the exaggerated antiquity claimed by many 

 for the human period in geology ; but the investigation and 

 statement of facts must be independent of all consideration 

 of such conseciuences. 

 M'Gill College, Montreal, 

 Dec. 24, 187o. 



