336 



Sketch of the Geology of 



I am also aware that many able European geologists 



term 



tinct formation. True, it is probably best to avoid terms 

 in description that involve theoretical considerations. 

 Biit if ever they are allowable, it would seem to be in 

 this case. For it is difficult to conceive, how any one 

 can carefully examine the diluvium of this country, and 

 not come to the conclusion, that if not produced origin- 

 ally by a deluge, it has all been modified and extensively 

 changed in its location by such a catastrophe. In Europe, 

 some geologists suppose that the superficial coat of 

 travelled detritus has resulted from causes now in opera- 

 tion, or from several deluges. But so far as this con- 

 tinent is concerned, I cannot see how the conclusion can 

 be avoided, that the last agency that has acted upon 

 such detritus was a powerful current of water over the 

 whole land from the north and northwest. We, there- 

 fore, do not greatly err In calHng this detritus diluvium; 

 however objectionable the term may be in Europe. I 

 make these remarks after having carefully read what 

 Mr- Lyell has said, in England, in his Principles of 



f 



M 



France, in 



Memoires 



Geologiques et P aleontologiques ^ on the other side of 

 the question. 



I have dwelt longer on the subject of diluvium, because 

 it has seemed to me, from the descriptions given us of 

 this deposite in Europe, that its characters are much less 

 satisfactorily developed in that quarter of the globe than 

 in our country ; especially as it respects orooves and 

 furrows upon the rocks in place. . This ; 

 certainly not common there; but in New Enf^land, and 



ppearance 



personal 



can 



And it seems 



