ON THEORIES OF THE EARTH. 391 



under the insufficient knowledge of his day, the views 

 of Fourrier. But his nucleus is surrounded, first, 

 with an "unknown dense fluid," and then with one of 

 water; the "abyss" supporting 1 a crust of land and 

 seas, as the antediluvian world. The deluge is pro- 

 duced hy the appulse of a comet, its vapour generated 

 the "rain," the water retired into the "abyss," and the 

 earth assumed its present form. The reader must 

 however be told, that the heat of the original earth 

 generated vice in the terrestrial inhabitants, while the 

 colder aquatic ones escaped both crime and condem- 

 nation. 



In spite of his practical knowledge. Woodward's 

 system is as deficient in truth as novelty. Seeing no- 

 thing but those English strata whose influence has 

 not yet ceased, his rocks are all deposited from 

 fluids, horizontally, according to their specific gravities, 

 as all contain shells. Pure ignorance is always better 

 than falsity : the difficulties of geology have ever been 

 produced by the Woodwards. He who must com- - 

 inence by sweeping, is choked by dust. I trust that 

 my successors will have the easier task. But the 

 Deluge, of course, forms the main hinge of his theory. 

 An abyss is broken up by the Divine command, sus- 

 pending the laws of cohesion : and so forth, as usual. 

 Unfortunate indeed has been this random thought of 

 Tertullian. Perverted views of an historical fact have 

 been the eternal millstone round the neck of theorists, 

 while the patient observer could form no plan, of which 

 this was not the foundation ; as, even now, they who 

 should know better, adopt a load which they cannot 

 carry, hoping, often, to gain favour, or something 

 better ; hoping, at least, to escape that which has been 

 hurled to crush conscientiousness and truth. But 

 why should we ridicule him who dissolves the insolu- 



