1 46 Remarks on Professor Eaton^s Communication. 



Art. XXIV. — Remarks addilional to the Review of Cony 

 beare and Phillipsh Geology of England and Wales, 

 (Vol. VII. No. 2. of this Journal,) with reference to the 

 communication of Professor Eaton in the last JVb. of this 

 work, page 26 1 . 



[Communicated by the author of the Review. — Ed.] 



We have doubted whether the remarks of Mr. Eatoa 

 upon our review of the work of Conj beare and Phillips, 

 call for any thing additional from us. We certainly have 

 no disposition to engage in a controversy on the subject, 

 nor do we perceive any evidence that such is IVIr. Eaton's 

 desire. But we think he has misapprehended us in some 

 respects, and probably his views differ in some respects 

 from ours ; and we feel it to be due to him, as well as to 

 ourselves, to explain our real meaning, and to give our 

 reasons for some of the opinions advanced in that review. 



If we do not misapprehend this gentleman, he represents 

 us as recommending the adoption, by American geologists, 

 of the new classification of rocks proposed by Mr. Cony- 

 beare. We really had no such intention; and we cannot 

 see that our language conveys this idea. We merely said 

 that we were " pleased with its remarkable simplicity," 

 and could not "see but it answered every purpose of 

 primitive, transition, and secondary;" and after stating 

 the system, we left it to others to form their opinion of if, 

 without offering any further arguments in its favour. Nay, 

 we did not even say that we had adopted the system our- 

 selves. But were we frankly to give our views concerning 

 the propriety of adopting this system, not only among 

 American, but also European geologists, we confess that 

 our recommendation would be given in favour of it. For 

 we still cannot see why it does not " exhibit an utter 

 exclusion of all hypothesis.'' The principle on which the 

 whole of this classification rests is simply this, that some 

 rocks are usually found above other rocks. The terms 

 employed by Mr» Conybeare to designate his orders, 

 (inferior, sub-medial, medial, super-medial, and superior,) 

 certainly imply nothing more. Now it appears to us, that 

 this principle is merely one of those facts in geology that 



