450 



THE GEOLOGIST. 



into it I am a^vare that gneiss and otlier metamorpliic rocks unite a crystalline 

 structui-e with stratification, and thus somewhat resemble those of purely 

 igneous agency ; but my language applied to rocks of a ])urely aqueous origin, 

 so that we agree on tliis point. It is not well hi making a few general observa- 

 tions upon any science to encumber oneself with minor considerations, neverthe- 

 less the metamorphic rock could hardly be urged as an objection to what I ha^^e 

 said, inasmuch as the gradual amalgamation you have s])oken of could not be 

 fairly construed mto dipping. In speaking of granite I must include the 

 various species of this substance. If I am supposed to err in calling it the 

 oldest rock, I shaU be obliged if any person will offer some reason for rejecting 

 this opinion ; when, both as regards this and every sentiment I have offered, I 

 shaU, if convinced of the falsity of them, be the first to own it. 



You inform me that my remarks on the time requisite for the formation of 

 strata, prior to historical times, are more illogical than the deductions of the 

 geologists I refer to ; but I tlunk I can show that this is not the case. If I 

 supposed that my argument had no better foundation than you appear to dis- 

 cover about it I should indeed have kept it to myself. I absolutely deny that 

 I have simply denied the truth of the notion contested : there is a substantial 

 reason for supposing that the earth was formed in a short space of time, apart 

 from geological considerations ; and until geologists prove that the peculiar 

 appearances connected with strata formed prior to historical times cannot be 

 explained without the supposition of the formation having extended over a vast 

 period of time, I cannot assent to the truth of their hypothesis. You perceive 

 I have assumed that these rocks present features which are not found ni those 

 of a later date which have been formed gradually ; nevertheless, I confess that 

 I have never been enabled to discover in what the peculiarities consist, and 

 should, therefore, be glad to learn what they are, if any exist. If these ancient 

 rocks present a different character to those more_ recently and far more slowly 

 formed, for once adopting an hypothesis as true, it onlj proves that their mode 

 of formation must have been very different, and that it must have been very 

 rapid, because that of later rocks has been slow. Consequently, if any such 

 peculiarities exist, they only prove the opposite of what geologists at present 

 profess to draw from them. If many geologists have not considered this, I 

 wonder at it. If the peculiarities of character alluded to really exist, they 

 certainly must prove that the formation of the rocks cannot have been similar ; 

 and, as we know that recent rocks, usmg this term in its geological sense, have 

 been slowly deposited, they prove that the earlier ones must have been very 

 rapidly formed. It may be thought that they would prove that these rocks 

 were deposited far slower than the others, or that this supposition is as likely 

 as the otlier ; but many considerations show that this hypothesis lacks consis- 

 tency. I doubt, however, that such peculiarities exist, or any, if any can be 

 found, which cannot be explained by the age of the strata they characterize. 



My reference to the Mosaic record, so far from being illogical or unpliiloso- 

 phical, appears to me to constitute a sound proceeding. From that account I 

 gather some reason, if I was sure that I understood it as it is intended to be 

 understood, I should say irresistible reason for supposing that the earth was 

 created in a short space of time. Geologists inform us that this was not the 

 case, and surely I am not illogical m demanding a satisfactory reason for their 

 opmion, before acquiescing in it. It is often said that the two records, nature 

 and revelation, should not be confused together ; but, while agreeing with this, 

 as regards scientific investigation in general, I maintain that the obvious mean- 

 ing of Scripture should not be considered figui'ative, be 'ore science has fully 

 proved that truth renders this necessary. In my third question, which you 

 very indcfiuitely condemn, I have given a supposition made use of by Dr. 

 Larthier, which appears to me highly probable. Trom yoiu- remarks about the 



