JDugald Bell — Glacial Mound in Glen Fruin. 417 



tliat case they would surely have borne distinct marks of assortment 

 and stratification, especially in localities where strong currents must 

 have been in operation. 



3. Nor, finally, is there any proof of a " great submergence " 

 prior to these latest works of the ice. This is where the advocates 

 of such a submergence join issue. They maintain that there was a 

 first or general glaciation, then a deep submergence, then a partial 

 or local glaciation, by which all distinct traces of the submergence 

 were removed. But a little reflection will show (a) that it is very 

 improbable any subsequent local glaciation could remove all traces 

 of the sea's presence at high levels, supposing it had been there. 

 The sea marks a horizontal line and goes into every nook and cranny 

 of the land along the line ; whereas the glacier marks a descending 

 line, and keeps to one main channel, not branching off in every 

 direction as the waters do. The area of the glacier, therefore, could 

 not coincide with that of the submergence so as to remove all traces 

 of the latter.' Then (6) if such traces had been entirely removed 



EiQ. 1. — Sketch Map showing position of Mound (M.) 



Fig. 2. — General Aspect of the Mound. 



from every glen like this G-len Fruin, they should at least be 

 discernible in the heaps of debris which the ice has left near the 

 mouths of such glens. All over the country there are innumerable 

 glacial mounds and heaps — the " sweepings " of glens which, in the 

 case of the alleged submergence, must have been sheltered inlets of 

 the sea, favourable to almost every form of marine life. These 

 heaps, as well as the Boulder-clay of the country generally, should 

 abound in fragments of marine fossils, if there had been such a 



^ See Trans. Geol. Soc. of Glasgow, vol. ix. p. 109. 



DECADE III. — VOL. VIII. — NO. IX. 



27 



