1848.] ROBERT CHAMBERS. 363 



of argument from the buttresses and terraces below the lower 

 shelf and some other arguments (without acknowledgment), 

 but he sneers at all his predecessors not having perceived the 

 importance of the short portions of lines intermediate between 

 the chief ones in Glen Roy ; whereas I commence the descrip- 

 tion of them with saying, that ' perceiving their importance, I 

 examined them with scrupulous care,' and expatiate at con- 

 siderable length on them. I have indirectly told him I do not 

 think he has quite claims to consider that he alone (which he 

 pretty directly asserts) has solved the problem of Glen Roy. 

 With respect to the terraces at lower levels coincident in 

 height all round Scotland and England, I am inclined to 

 believe he shows some little probability of there being some 

 leading ones coincident, but much more exact evidence is 

 required. Would you believe it credible ? he advances as a 

 probable solution to account for the rise of Great Britain that 

 in some great ocean one-twentieth of the bottom of the whole 

 aqueous surface of the globe has sunk in (he does not say 

 where he puts it) for a thickness of half a mile, and this he 

 has calculated would make an apparent rise of 130 feet." 



C. Darwin to C. Lyell. 



Down [June 1848]. 



MY DEAR LYELL, Out of justice to Chambers I must 

 trouble you with one line to say, as far as I am personally 

 concerned in Glen Roy, he has made the amende honorable, 

 and pleads guilty through inadvertency of taking my two 

 lines of arguments and facts without acknowledgment. He 

 concluded by saying he "came to the same point by an 

 independent course of inquiry, which in a small degree 

 excuses this inadvertency." His letter altogether shows a 

 very good disposition, and says he is " much gratified with 

 the measured approbation which you bestow, &c." I am 

 heartily glad I was able to say in truth that I thought he had 



