242 



NATURE 



[July 10, 1890 



as time went on,.the lower limit of the Silurian system 

 descended, like a stone sinking in the mire, till at last 

 " Lower Silurian " actually included the Menevian rocks, 

 as may be seen to this day at the Museum in Jermyn 

 Street. This being so, one would have thought that, even 

 if Murchison had preceded Sedgwick in the publica- 

 tion of the results of his work— which was not the 

 case — the two vital errors in his reading of the beds 

 between the base of the Wenlock and that of the Arenig 

 ought to have deprived him of any claim on account of 

 prior nomenclature. Sedgwick had placed the beds of 

 his Cambrian system in right order from base to top — that 

 is, to beneath the so-called Upper Llandovery. These 

 facts appear to be fully proved, and thus Sedgwick had 

 good cause to feel aggrieved. Into the more personal 

 aspect of the controversy it is needless to enter. One 

 cannot greatly wonder that when once a rift opened in 

 the lute it quickly became a rent, for the two men were 

 so unlike, both in their excellencies and their defects. 

 Nor can it be denied that Murchison had his grievances. 

 Sedgwick was vexatious as a coadjutor in the preparation 

 of papers, for he was unpunctual and unready ; he was also 

 slow in duly publishing the results of his own labours, 

 contenting himself too much with informal communica- 

 tions toi the British Association and the Cambridge 

 Philosophical Society, instead of laying carefully written 

 memoirs before the Geological Society. But it must be 

 remembered that his time was much occupied. His 

 fellowship, his professorship, his prebend — all entailed 

 duties which were often heavy ; and Sedgwick was too 

 honourable a man not to give " a full pennyworth " to 

 those who bought from him. He had to work to live, for 

 he had no private means. It cannot, however, be denied 

 that he interpreted too literally the precept, " Whatsoever 

 thy hand findeth to do, do it with all thy might." Social \ 

 engagements, political contests, University disputes, too ; 

 often turned his attention from the main work of his life, 

 and gave some ground for Lyell's severe remark : — " He 

 has not the application necessary to make his splendid 

 abilities tell in a work. Besides, everyone leads him 

 astray ; ... to become great in science, a man must be 

 nearly as devoted as a lawyer, and must have more than 

 mere talent." Still it must be remembered that Sedg- 

 wick's health, notwithstanding the great age to which he 

 attained, was far from good, and his constitutional ills , 

 were those which make continued sedentary work 

 extremely trying. He was also unlucky in the way of 

 accidents : a dislocated wrist, a broken arm, bad falls, 

 an eye permanently injured, make up a large catalogue 

 of damages for a Cambridge Professor. 



Still, although I take Prof. Hughes's view as to the rights 

 of the case, I cannot, under existing circumstances, agree 

 with his condemnation of the proposal to give a new name 

 — Ordovician — to the beds between the base of the May 

 Hill Sandstone and that of the Arenig. "One shell is given 

 to Sedgwick, another to Murchison, but who gets the 

 oyster ?" A smart remark, doubtless, but like many such 

 rather misleading. There is no question of shell or 

 oyster [in the matter. Each part is equally edible —or 

 indigestible. Granted that Sedgwick has the better title, 

 possession, in questions where the right is not wholly on 

 one side, counts for something with practical men. Cam- 

 <brian also, as defined by Sedgwick, is rather dispropor- 

 NO. 1080, VOL. 42] 



tionately large, and the pai^ontological break beneath 

 the Arenig is more marked than that which severs the 

 Cambrian from the Silurian. I venture to think that, 

 apart from personal questions, a tripartite division would 

 be pronounced most in accordance with the principles of 

 geological classification, and should not be surprised, if 

 this be repudiated by Sedgwick's defenders, at the ultimate 

 disappearance of Cambrian in the omnivorous maw of 

 Silurian. 



Sedgwick's permanent estrangement from the Geological 

 Society I venture to think a mistake. Doubtless he had 

 good cause for indignation at his treatment by its Council, 

 and the well-meant, but arbitrary, action of one of its 

 ofificers. But a Council is only a temporary aggregate of 

 individuals, and the offence after a time should have 

 been condoned. Its members did not really understand 

 the question at issue ; they were evidently actuated, not 

 by any desire to be unjust, but by a nervous anxiety to 

 keep the peace, and forgot, as men so often do, that when 

 a sore is hidden under a plaster, it commonly festers. 

 So the event proved in this case : molluscous amiability 

 met with its usual reward. If the combatants had " fought 

 it out," fairly and honourably, there would have been 

 more chance of an ultimate reconciliation. 



These interesting volumes enable us better than ever 

 to estimate Sedgwick's place among the geologists of his 

 generation. His especial strength lay in stratigraphy. 

 In his power of unravelling a comphcated district by 

 attention mainly to physical evidence he has never been 

 equalled. He was a patient and unwearied collector of 

 facts, with a wholesome dread of viewing them " through 

 the distorting medium of an hypothesis." Yet it must be 

 admitted that his judgment was often warped by pre- 

 judice, using the word in its technical sense. His great 

 power is best displayed when he attacks a problem which 

 is completely novel ; for, reformer though he was in 

 politics, his mind, in scientific matters, had a distinctly 

 "conservative" bias, and was too much influenced by 

 ideas which had no better authority than tradition. Of 

 this defect the book records several instances. It will 

 suffice to mention his opposition to Lyell's " Principles 



^ of Geology" and to Darwin's " Origin of Species." It is 

 of course possible to overstate the doctrine of uniformity 

 and misuse the hypothesis of evolution ; but the progress 



I of knowledge has not justified Sedgwick's attacks on 

 the main arguments of these works, and it must be 

 admitted that he was inferior to their authors in power 

 of inductive generalization. Perhaps no better example 

 could be found of Sedgwick's strength and weakness 



I than his well-known paper " On the Structure of Large 

 Mineral Masses," where a magnificent co-ordination of 

 facts has a somewhat disappointing conclusion. 



But even if we grant defects in the geologist as in the 

 man, it is impossible to deny his real greatness. Those 

 who loved Sedgwick as a friend are fast becoming few ; 

 but the number of those who reverence his memory as 

 that of a master in science is likely to increase rather than 

 to diminish as his work is weighed in the balance and 

 tested by time. To myself, though I did not know him 

 in his prime, he always appeared to be not only truly 

 noble in spirit, but also illuminated with that divine fire 

 which distinguishes the man of genius from the man of 

 talent. T. G. Bonney. 



