Vol. 57.] ANMVEESARr ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT. IxV 



that the distinctness of these two points of view is but the expres- 

 sion of our ignorance as to the genetic relationships of the different 

 types. Facts as to composition, structure, and the like, accumulate- 

 faster than they can be interpreted ; and our classifications are,, 

 therefore, necessarily more or less artificial. But there is that 

 within us which compels us to bring our classifications into accord 

 with our views as to genesis. Phylogeny must in the end control 

 classification, both in the organic and inorganic worlds. As soon as^ 

 we realize that any scheme of classification places together objects 

 which have no genetic relationship, or groups them irrespective of 

 sudh relationship, we become dissatisfied with it. The old classi- 

 fications need not be thrown over the moment that their imper- 

 fections are glimpsed ; but in the end they have to be discarded, 

 and the new ideas find expression in a new classification. Thus 



Thro' the ages one increasing purpose runs, 

 And the thoughts of men are widened with the process of the suns. 



How far Hutton was in advance of his time on matters relating 

 to petrogenesis is illustrated by the fact that more than half a 

 century elapsed before his ideas found expression in systematic 

 treatises. Yet the separation of rocks into igneous, sedimentary ,- 

 and metamorphic, and the further subdivision of the igneous rocks 

 into plutonic and volcanic, follow naturally and logically from his 

 fundamental conceptions. 



The reason for the tardy recognition of what is now generally 

 admitted to be the true basis of classification is not far to seek.. 

 Hutton was no system atist. Werner, on the other hand, was not 

 only a keen observer, but he possessed in quite an exceptional 

 degree the power of describing what he observed in precise and' 

 definite terms,- and of grouping his facts according to their supposed 

 relationship. He was, in short, a born systematist, and this, com- 

 bined with his eloquence and enthusiasm, gave him a commanding 

 influence. In looking back at these two striking figures of the 

 heroic age, Werner and Hutton, it is almost impossible to avoid a 

 feeliug of regret that the one did not possess what the other lacked. 

 But such regrets are useless. Let us honour them both. 



The authors of systematic treatises on rocks published during the 

 first half of the century were all under the spell of Werner, and 

 they were still further hampered by their ignorance of the com- 

 position of those rocks which are of so fine a grain that their 

 constituents cannot be determined with the naked eye, or with the 

 aid of a simple magnifying-lens. The treatises of Hauy, Brougniart,. 



