334 Correspondence — Mr. J. R. Gregory. 



other parts of the world, we are led from the geological character of 

 that part of the country to consider it impossible that any diamonds 

 could really have been found there : I must beg still to hold to that 

 opinion — first, because Dr. Atherstone himself has no direct know- 

 ledge of the district referred to, nor, secondly, of the exact places 

 where the diamonds were really found ;^ and, thirdly, because Dr. 

 Atherstone told me himself that he did not know much about G-eo- 

 logy, but that his son was a pupil of Professor Tennant's, and he 

 was therefore interested in Geology. (2) As to my silence regard- 

 ing the presence of Dicynodon remains : I was quite aware of their 

 occurrence a few miles south of Gradock, and saw many specimens 

 when at Dr. Grey's, of Gradock, but not any " beautifully perfect 

 reptilian and other fossils" (vide p. 211), as stated by Dr. Atherstone; 

 indeed these remains are always in a very fragmentary condition, by 

 reason of the indurated and unworkable nature of the matrix in which 

 they are contained. But south of Gradock does not mean — the whole 

 district in a direct line from Gradock to Hopetown — which is what 

 I stated in my paper (Geol. Mag. Vol. V. p. 558), 



It should always be borne in mind that Geology, like many other 

 sciences, is not infallible, and that it is quite possible that diamonds 

 may be found in rocks where past experience has taught us they 

 never occur,^ but still we find the maxim eocperientia docet usually 

 holds good in diamond-prospecting as well as in that for gold. 



Fourthly, Dr. Atherstone's statement (p. 212) that, from a sight 

 of a " photograph and plaster-cast," which he showed me, I " at once 

 pronounced an opinion as to its quality, declaring it to be a ' boart ' 

 diamond of very little value," needs correction. What I really said 

 was that, from the multitude of stri^ on the imperfect faces of the 

 dodecahedron (the form of which I could distinguish), I was led to 

 conclude that it was not of first-rate quality ; as to its value I gave 

 no opinion whatever. 



I could have wished (did space permit) to call attention to many 

 grossly incorrect statements which have been printed in the Cape 

 newspapers, both as to the diamond discoveries and also in reference 

 to myself; but the proverb says, "passion is ever the enemy of 

 truth." Both diamond and gold manias have affected this Golony, 

 although, happily, the gold-fever is to some extent allayed by the 

 fact that the precious metal has not hitherto been found in paying 

 quantities. With the past year's experience, it is now hardly neces- 

 sary to say to investors, " at all great bargains pause awhile." 



James K. Gregokt. 

 15, Russell Street, Covent Garden, London, May 20th, 1869. 

 ^ All Dr. Atherstone's information (as may be seen by a reference to his article in 

 the May Number, pp. 208-213), is obtained from the statements made by Dutch 

 Boers, natives, farm-labourers, women, and children ; and he does not appear in any 

 single instance to have visited any reputed diamond region, so that at present we are 

 no nearer than we were last year to the actual locality/ whence the diamonds an- 

 nounced were derived. — J. E.G. 



2 Mr. Sorby's recent paper, read before the Eoyal Society, suggests quite a new- 

 theory as to the formation of diamonds, and deserves careful attention ; but little is 

 known of the origin of diamonds or their parent rock, so that we must not entirely 

 put aside the old theory for the new. — J.E.G. 



