On the Falls of Niagara. 327 



All who have investigated Niagara as a geological problem, seem to 

 have assumed it as a conclusion nearly self evident, that the Falls 

 have necessarily been once at Queenstown ridge, and that they 

 have reached their present place, seven miles oif, by virtue solely, 

 of their own power of wearing away the rock. This opinion (it is 

 but an opinion) is the result merely of a general contemplation of 

 the scene, and not a deduction from any researches of so rigorous 

 and exact a character as seem requisite to determine such a ques- 

 tion. In the present meagre condition of our information respect- 

 ing the stmcture of the neicrhboring region, such a doctrine cannot, 

 I conceive, be much more than a mere surmise, and 1 hold it to be 

 altogether premature, to erect upon such grounds any calculation in 

 yearns of the probable duration of the cataract. 



The following in the words of Mr. Bakewell, presents the pre- 

 vailing doctrine regarding the age of the Falls. " On \iewing this 

 highly interesting scene, the mind is irresistibly carried back to the 

 time when a mighty flood poured over the once united precipice 

 above Queenstown. This fact cannot be doubted by any one who 

 sees its present appearance and who duly reflects on what a falling 

 body of water, so immense, so rapid, and so resistless in its course 

 as the river of Niagara is capable of accomplishing in a series of 

 ages. Takino; it for granted that the falls have been once at the 

 ridge, it is a curious question to inquire when were they there ? An 

 approximate solution to this enquiry w^ill be given if Mr. Forsyth's 

 statement be allowed, of the falls having receded nearly fifty yards 

 in the last forty years and if it be granted that this has been the con- 

 stant ratio of their recession. The distance from the termination of 

 the gorge to the fall is seven miles equal to 12,520 yards w-hich 

 gives 9856 years for the period in which they have been retrograding 

 to where they now are." 



Mr. Fairholme, proceeding upon nearly the same data* endeavors 

 to prove that its retrocession was once much more rapid than at the 

 present day, by supposing that the slope of the land gave the falls ori- 

 ginally a less elevation, that the excavation was narrower, and the 

 rocky materials more destructible. In answer to the views of Mr. 

 Bakewell, for whose fidelity of description, so far as it goes, I have a 

 high respect, I would suggest that we are hardly entitled to assume 

 the statement of Mr. Forsyth as a sufficient basis for a calculation 

 so important in its' theoretical applications. 



* See London and Edinburgl) Philosophical Magazine for July, 1834. 



