A.] FORBES AND RKXDU. 541 



by De Charpentier, who was zealously attached to the Dilatation 

 Theory, which was at the time in vogue. Indeed, there are 

 passages in it which leave it quite open to the author to be con- 

 sidered as a supporter of this view. 1 But such a review of con- 

 temporary writers would not only lead me too far, but would at 

 best be but secondary proof of what I have undertaken to 

 explain on its own merits. 



There is, however, one reviewal of the question, as between 



>u's work and mine, which I cannot injustice to myself omit, 

 because it anticipated the very claim now raised by Professor 



hill, at least tied re years before he had entered on the sub- 

 ject at all, and therefore cannot possibly be regarded as having 

 any personal application. In quoting it, I emphatically dis- 



Q any imputation of unworthy motives to Professor Tymlall. 

 At the same time, it is impossible to read so striking a predic- 



>f the course which he has taken without noticing that it 



- a not-unneeded warning, how mistaken zeal on behalf of 

 ; a deserving client may take too strongly a forensic tone, 



and may even wear the appearance of detraction and hostility 



Bother. The Edinburgh Review was one of the first in which 



\ ere noticed, and the writer thus stated the case of 



M. lieudu and my own in the number for July 1844, p. 149 : 



'Amid this penury ol thought, it did occur to M. Rendu, Bishop of 



Ann^cy, that "glaciers might roll down declivities like a ductile and liquid 



lava.'' * He speaks oi glaciers d'ecoulement, in contradistinction to glaciers re- 



tercoirs. He was the first, likewise, to conjecture that the central portions of 



glaciers move faster than the'latcral ones, as in fluid motion ; and he distinctly 



3, " that there was a number of facts which would make us believe that the 



,iiee of glaciers possesses a kind of ductility, which permits then: to 



mould themselves on the locality which they occupy, to become thinner, and to 



:K! expand themselves in the same manner as a soft paste would do." 8 



!..)wi-ver, just though it be, was too bold to imvt with reception even 



philosophers; and when the author of it himself states, " that the rigidity 



of amass of ice, when struck, is in direct opposition to this theory (thou r 



lenta made >cs may give other results)," we cannot but view 



it as one of those glimmerings of truth which would have soon died away, had 



umled by that pure atmosphere of oxygen, in 



which our author has mail:- it Hash into a brilliant light. Although he has, with 



Candour, published .-ml givru currency to tl. .is conjectures of 



fear that tlmst spiteful critics who delight in depreciating in- 



\\ill seek to confer the honour of the new theory on 



i philosopher, however, will count eiianee such a 



rbcs's theory was established by numerous and din, 



iil d'ailleurs un fait dcja acquis 

 il ne sail quellc est la cause qui peut leur donncr cc mouvtu.. 



; ie last sentence of Extract (<r\ page 

 * Thtorit ds* Glacier* dt Savoie. Clmm ( J3. * Ibid, r 



