478 Correspondence. 



faulty thoiigli it be — which appeared in the Geological Magazine 

 for August last. — Edit. 



To the Editor of the Geological Magazine. 



Sir, — In the number of your Magazine for August appears a 

 report of a lecture delivered by me at the Eoyal Institution on the 

 31st of May, on the Chemistry of the Primeval Earth. It is there 

 described as " a full report taken down verbatim in short-hand, and 

 now printed for the first time." For the sake of your numerous 

 readers I regret that this report, disfigured by many errors, should 

 have appeared in the pages of the Geological Magazine. When, 

 moreover, I am aware that those who counselled its publication were 

 aware that I had preferred to substitute for it a carefully revised 

 one, prepared from this short-hand report, together with my own 

 brief notes containing the heads of my extempore lecture, I can 

 but feel that the proceeding was inconsiderate and unjust alike to 

 the lecturer and to your readers. This revised report, as many are 

 aware, has already appeared in the proceedings of the Koyal 

 Institution, and also in the Chemical News of June 27th, where it is 

 expressly stated that it is the report revised by the author. 



The short-hand writer is doubtless a competent reporter, and has 

 in most cases reproduced my language with fidelity ; but, especially 

 in the more technical portions, has fallen into numerous errors, for 

 the most part obvious to the scientific reader. These, with one or 

 two little omissions, do not in any way in fact affect my argument ; 

 all the points of which may be well enough understood from the 

 report when corrected as below, as the reader may assure himself 

 by comparing it with my revised report in the proceedings of the 

 Eoyal Institution, and in the Chemical News. 



I subjoin a list of errata, which will show some of the mistakes 

 into which the reporter has fallen — in the report published in your 

 Magazine of August : — 



On page 361. — The six lines from line 25, beginning witli " Messrs. Hopkins and 

 Fairbairn," present an unintelligible confusion, in reproducing my statement that 

 these gentlemen had shown pressure to augment the fusing point of such bodies as 

 contract in solidifying, and that, as we might suppose, the solidification of the earth 

 to commence at the centre, the temperature there would not be above that of 

 congelation. 



Page 361, line 30, a/fer "increase" rea<? "of temperature." 

 „ „ 43, for " first few metals " read " elements." 

 „ 362, „ 22, before ^' gases" read " &cii." 



363, „ 2, /or " whole of the afiinity of the acid was " ym«f " whole of the 



acids were." 

 364 „ 6, for "whole" read "most." It is obvious that dolomite and 

 gypsum, together with numerous silicated rocks, such as 

 steatite and serpentine, of which I have elsewhere maintained 

 the aqueous and chemicnl origin, are excluded. 

 ^, „ „ 39, for " their hands " read " at hand." 



Trusting that you wiU do me the justice to insert the above 

 remarks and corrections, I remain. Sir, 



Your obedient servant, 

 August 2ith, 1867. T. Stekky Hunt. 



