AMERICAN GEOLOGY — DECADE OF 1830—1839. 357 



that in the midst of geological pursuits a horrid vacancy has yawned in my heart, 

 and a grinning devil laughed unit a drawer of fossil shells. A small Hamlet in 

 science, 1 grow <>ld and reform not. 



Conrad, though primarily a paleontologist, was sometimes drawn 

 out of his chosen held by phenomena too obvious to be overlooked, 

 and concerning- the nature of which little was actually known, even by 

 the best authorities. The occurrence of enormous 

 Se Driit/iSSp. 01 bowlders in the drift and resting often upon uncon- 

 solidated sand and gravel, naturally called for an 

 explanation. That such could not have been brought into their present 

 position through floods was to him obvious, neither could they have 

 been floated by ice floes from the north during a period of terrestrial 

 depression. 



He assumed, rather, that the country, previous to what is now 

 known as the glacial epoch, was covered with enormous lakes, and 

 that a change in climate ensued, causing them to become frozen 

 and converted into immense glaciers. At the same time, elevations 

 and depressions of the earth's surface were in progress, giving various 

 degrees of inclination to the' frozen surfaces of the lakes, down which 

 bowlders, sand, and gravel would be impelled to great distances from 

 the points of their origin. The impelling force might, in some cases. 

 be gravity alone; but during the close of the epoch, when the tempera- 

 ture had risen, vast landslides — avalanches of mud tilled with detritus — 

 would be propelled for many miles over these frozen lakes, and when 

 the ice disappeared the same would be deposited in the form of a 

 promiscuous aggregate of sand, gravel, pebbles, and bowlders. The 

 polished and scratched surface of the rocks in western New York he 

 ascribed to the action of sand and pebbles, which were carried by 

 moving bodies of ice, that is. apparently, to local glaciation. 



The year 1839 seems to have been one of remarkable activity among 

 American geologists. Moreover, the various publications began to 

 show a greater variation in individual opinion and a disposition on 

 the part of maiiy to judge for themselves rather than 

 v^w g s e ^839 ayes s follow too implicitly the opinions of others. Many of 

 the ideas put forward were naturally crude (How" could 

 they be otherwise?), but furnish us with a very good insight into the 

 gradual evolution of ideas upon a great variety of subjects. 



George E. Hayes wrote upon the geology and topograph}" of western 

 New" York and incidentally put forth several theoretical ideas worth}- 

 of mention, even though ill-founded. He took occasion to deplore the 

 common custom of invoking the assistance of the Noachian deluge to 

 account for such results as erosion and the distribution of the drift. 

 He felt that " the condition of a continent gradually elevated from the 

 ocean, whether by volcanic action or by the expansive force of crys 

 tallization, or by any other cause whatever, would be such as to 



