GRANITE. 93 



Similar occurrences are described by Runnier tind I)c 

 Bonnard, in the Hartz and near Dresden ; as " Sye- 

 nites" in the same position are also mentioned by 

 Brongniart, Ornalius de Halloy and Erigelhardt. As 

 far as the sight of the specimens can determine any 

 thing, I should refer these to Granite : they may be 

 members of the trap family ; but observations which 

 consist of names or specimens only, are useless for the 

 purposes of geological reasoning. Brongniart's no- 

 menclature disregards all geological relations. 



If no opinion, therefore, can be formed, of these 

 last, except by those who are satisfied with mineral 

 characters and names, we have still to find a case where 

 a mass of granite, beneath the primary strata, is con- 

 nected with another lying above the secondary. This 

 case alone could satisfy all the conditions ; since it 

 would be admitted as an overlying granite by all par- 

 ties. The consequences however, must obviously be, 

 to prove, what I formerly suggested, that the origin of 

 trap and granite are the same, and that hence all their 

 mineral arid geological characters correspond so nearly. 



Granite is, perhaps most commonly, found in huge 

 masses, void of all configuration, and even of a ten- 

 dency to one, though in other cases it presents pe- 

 culiar structures. But no instance of stratification has 

 been produced, notwithstanding the repeated asser- 

 tions of this nature ; nor can it exist, consistently with 

 the meaning of that term. It is true that beds of 

 gneiss cannot sometimes be distinguished ftorn granite; 

 but these are only extreme cases of a stratum which, 

 in granitic gneiss, frequently approaches to the cha- 

 racter of granite. Aberdeeenshire presents striking 

 examples of this fact, while there is often a perfect 

 transition' between the two. The instances of strati- 

 fication commonly adduced, are, however, examples of 



