40 DAVID MILNE HOME ON THE 
on the subject, and stated their conviction, that Professor GEIKIE had either not 
correctly observed, or had not properly understood, the Leith deposit. 
Professor GEIKIE was not, however, convinced of having made any mistake, 
for in his “‘ Scenery and Geology of Scotland,” published in 1865, he has a chapter 
on “ Raised Beaches,” to show how “the country, after its submergence, 7 ose 
again slowly, with long intervals of rest, each of these pauses giving the sea an 
opportunity of cutting a notch or horizontal terrace along the margin of the 
land.” He states that the “lowest and latest terrace, long ago described by 
Mr Smiru of Jordanhill and Mr Mactarey, runs at a height of about twenty or 
twenty-five feet above high water. It has yielded, in several places, works of 
human fabrication. From the nature of these remains, and other evidence, I 
have been led to infer, that its formation has taken place, either in whole or in 
part, since the first century in our era.” In a foot-note, he mentions that his 
inference had been disputed by Mr Bryson and Mr Carrvutuers; but he offers 
no refutation, and indeed takes no notice of the grounds of their objections. 
Professor GEIKIE’s opinion on this subject has been adopted, without any 
further evidence, by the distinguished geologist who succeeded Sir RopERICcK 
Murcuison as Director-General of the Surveys of the United Kingdom. Pro- 
fessor Ramsay, in his work quite recently published on the “Geology and 
Geography of Great Britain,” specially refers to the “inference which has been 
drawn by my colleague, Professor GEIKIE, that this last elevation (of Scotland) 
took place at a time that is historical, and even since the Roman occupation of 
our island.” (P. 251.) Professor Ramsay enumerates the facts from which this 
inference was drawn,—one of these is “ the great wall of Antoninus,”—termi- 
nating at its east end, and also at its west end, in a way which Professor 
Ramsay suggests can only be accounted for by supposing, that since the wall 
was built, it has been lifted above the sea-level, twenty-five feet higher than 
before. | 
A few months ago, Sir Cuartes LYELL wrote to me, that in gathering 
materials for a new edition of his “ Antiquity of Man,” he had fallen in with 
my little book on the “ Estuary of the Forth,” in which book, notice is taken 
of this alleged recent upheaval of Scotland, and circumstances stated which 
were to his mind very conclusive, against the soundness of that opinion. He 
asked from me information on two points—Ist, Whether I knew of any answer 
which had been given to my objections; and, 2d, Whether, since the publi- 
cation of my book, any new facts bearing on the question had been discovered. 
To the first inquiry, whether I knew of any answer which had been given to 
my objections, I replied in the negative. The only reviews of my book which 
I had seen were in “ Nature” newspaper, and the “ Atheneum,” both in Sep- 
tember 1871. The review in “ Nature” (bearing the initials J. G.), whilst it took 
exception to other parts of my book, made no allusion to that part of it which 

