G E 



thology, were ill defined in the 

 infancy of civilization." 



Werner appears to have regarded 

 geology as little other than a sub- 

 ordinate department of mineralogy, 

 and Desmarest included it under 

 the head of physical geography. 

 Dr. Hutton, in his treatise, pub- 

 lished in 1795, first endeavoured to 

 draw a positive line of demarcation 

 between geology and cosmogony, 

 declaring that geology was in no 

 ways concerned with questions as 

 to the origin of things ; and, in fact, 

 geology differs as widely from cos- 

 mogony, as hypothesis concerning 

 the mode of man's first creation 

 differs from history. Philosophers 

 for some ages past neglected the 

 examination of the earth, content- 

 ing themselves with vain specula- 

 tions respecting its formation ; and 

 to Strabo, who flourished under 

 Augustus, and died under Tiberius, 

 about the year 25, and to the old 

 philosophers, who studied the local 

 phenomena of their countries, would 

 the title of geologists with more 

 propriety be given than to Burnet 

 and Buffon, whose systems of cos- 

 mogony have more the air of a 

 system of romance, than of a serious 

 generalization of facts. In tracing 

 the history of geology from the 

 close of the seventeenth to the end 

 of the eighteenth century, we find 

 the science retarded by the wild 

 and visionary speculations of a host 

 of writers ; to enter on these would, 

 however, far exceed the limits of a 

 work of this kind, and those desi- 

 rous of so doing, I would refer to 

 Sir C. LyelPs admirable work, 

 Principles of Geology. 



Hutton, following the example 

 of Newton in astronomy, endea- 

 voured to give fixed principles to 

 geology; but, at that time, too 

 little progress had been made in the 

 science, to enable him to realize so 

 noble a project. A brighter period 

 has now dawned, and the following 



[ 189 ] G E 



out the only true method, namely, 

 that of keeping within the boundary 

 of inductive philosophy, has led to 

 the most important results. 



Happily, facts have multiplied 

 so rapidly that geology is daily 

 emerging from that state when an 

 hypothesis, provided it were bril- 

 liant or ingenious, was sure of ad- 

 vocates and temporary success, even 

 when it sinned against the laws of 

 physics and facts themselves. 



One of the greatest difficulties 

 with which geology has had to 

 contend, is the false notion enter- 

 tained by many well-meaning but 

 weak persons, that geology was 

 opposed to Scripture revelation, 

 and that geological researches 

 might prove injurious to religion. 

 Unfortunately prejudice and ignor- 

 ance have too frequently called in 

 the aid of religious feeling to thwart 

 and oppose the progress of scientific 

 knowledge ; and it is too much to 

 be feared that did the same power 

 now exist, the geologists of the 

 present day might suffer the same 

 persecutions that Gallileo Gallilei 

 did, and that the works of Lyell, 

 Buckland, De la Beche, Conybeare, 

 Hurchison, Phillips, Sedgwick, 

 Mantell, and a host of others, would 

 swell the catalogue of the forbidden 

 list. 



Why, it may be asked, should 

 persons whose opinions are founded 

 on the basis of immutable truth 

 fear the elicitation of truth? or 

 what has religion to fear from the 

 minutest, the most searching, in- 

 vestigation ? Let it ever be borne 

 in mind that, on the one hand, 

 truth can never be opposed to truth, 

 and, on the other, that error is only 

 to be effectually confounded by 

 searching deep and tracing it to its 

 source. 



Nothing can be more unfounded 

 than the objection which has been 

 taken against the study of natural 

 philosophy, and, indeed, against all 



