148 Remarks on Professor Eaton'' s Communication. 



learn these names, but also to learn that their literal 

 meaning is false; whereas, were things correctly named, 

 the literal meaning might help, instead of retarding him, 

 in his progress. How striking an instance of the impor- 

 tance of this principle, is presented to us in the reforma- 

 tion that has taken place within a few years in chemical 

 nomenclature! Yet we by no means suppose this abuse 

 of terms to be great enough, in all the sciences, to justify 

 any sudden and general changes, since the evils of such a 

 revolution would be greater than thog^ which would be 

 thereby remedied. But there is a very great difference 

 in d'fTerent cases, in the magnitude of the evil here 

 referred to. In those instances where things derived 

 their names from a real or fancied resemblance to some 

 real or fancied object, (as is the fact in all or nearly all 

 those cases mentioned by Mr. Eaton,) a change would be 

 of little importance, since the name itself is not supposed 

 to describe the thing. But in some instances the hypo- 

 thetical views on which a name is founded, constitute the 

 essence of a description of the object designated; and if 

 you abstract those hypothetical views, you leave the 

 object ' without form, and void.' Such cases as these, 

 especially when the hypothesis is every day growing more 

 doubtful call for immediate reformation, and if we do not 

 greatly mistake, the Wernerian names, to which we ob- 

 jected, form one of these cases. We do not so much 

 disapprove of primitive and secondary: but take away 

 from transition the hypothesis from which it was derived, 

 and we very much doubt whether any distinctive char- 

 acters can be found in nature, that would definitely 

 describe it to the student. On this point we are happy in 

 quoting the opinion of one of the ablest and most judicious 

 geologists living. " 1 shall now, perhaps," says Dr. Mac- 

 CuMock, " be expected to assign a place to this rock, (lime- 

 stone,) in the usual division of primary, transition, and 

 Jloetz, distinctions which I am inclined to think are more 

 easily made in the closet than in the field. In the present 

 stale of geological science, it would appear a safer prac- 

 tice in this case, as in many others, to describe that which 

 actually exists, without the use of hypothetical terms, 

 which only serve to perplex the observer, and to mislead 

 the student, who either boldly pronounces on the character 

 which suits his particular creed, or modestly supposes 



