130 FACTS VERSUS THEORY. CHAP. xi. 



been some one writing upon the geology of Caithness," 

 he said. " His writing is very good, but his premises 

 are incorrect. He cannot have seen the rocks, except 

 from a gig, when he passed along the road ; and now he 

 drags them in to elucidate his theory. When I want tc 

 know what a rock is, I go to it. I hammer it ; I dissect 

 it. I then know what it really is. I object to this 

 eternal theorising. My idea is that we know very little 

 of geology, yet these men have got it dignified by the 

 name of a science. The science of geology! Why, 

 don't they see that there are only a very few exposed 

 rocks which we can study. It is only a small bit of 

 the crust of the earth that we can inspect. What are 

 the rocks that we can see, compared with the immense 

 mass lying underground, or forming the ocean bed, 

 which we can never see ? No, no ; we must just work 

 patiently on, colled facts, and in course of time geology 

 may develop into a science." 



Dick even found that some of the fossil fish and 

 fossil branches that he had found in the course of his 

 investigations were turned against himself. He had 

 sent a fossil branch, which had been found in a Caith- 

 ness quarry, to a friend in the south, thinking it to be 

 of value. He was afterwards surprised to find an 

 engraving of the fossil branch given in a geological pub- 

 lication, with an amount of letterpress, arguing out a 

 theory which Dick had expressed himself as decidedly 

 opposed to. Not only was the theory incorrect, but the 

 fossil was misengraved, having received additions which 

 were not warranted, and illustrated by sections which 



