6 The Origin of the 



these clialk lands were once the bottom of the sea. 

 It may be so ; but the sea is a diffusive element. 

 How came the chalk deposit to be confined to those 

 well-defined lines, and that for innumerable a^es 

 upon ages, while the supposed microscopic manu- 

 facturers were at work making it ? The diffusive 

 element of the water is assumed to have supported 

 these operations only on certain limited breadths in 

 well-defined lines, and not at all elsewhere ; and this 

 to the depth of hundreds of feet. Why not else- 

 where ? Again the Chalk Formation cannot be 

 accounted for separately from the Flint. The chalk 

 cliffs and some deep railway cuttings, exhibit the 

 flints deposited in parallel horizontal layers, one 

 layer above another, separated by intervening 

 breadths of chalk. How came this about ? The 

 larger flints, when broken, are often found to contain 

 portions of pure chalk in their interior, and this 

 demonstrates simultaneous origin. But the micro- 

 scopic shell-fish are not even supposed to have any- 

 thing to do with the creation of the flints, nor with 

 the deposit of them in those regular layers ; nor is 

 it explained how they made the chalk in the flint's 

 interior. The flint under the microscope exhibits 

 chalk in particles disseminated through its substance; 

 and it is also broadly crusted on its exterior with 

 chalk in hard combination with the flint. To assign 

 a cause for the chalk which ignores the flint would 

 be unworthy of science. If the chalk was formed at 

 the bottom of the sea, the flint must have been 

 formed there also. If there are specimens of flint 

 which were not formed there, they will equally 

 disprove the marine origin of the chalk in connection 

 with them ; and found even in their interior. I 

 have carefully examined by the microscope some 



