498 



THE GEOLOGIST. 



obliquely ; and not to weary the reader with too numerous selections of such 

 palpable fancies, we restrain ourselves to the notice of one other — plate vii., 

 fio-."2. Let us quote the description of this "Pig. 2. — 'Terebratula': The 

 entire pebble was formed inside of a ' pecten'-shell, and inside the pebble lies this 

 formation, which was a living organism connected with the hinge." 



Can a more magnificent jumble of absurdities be penned ? This specimen, as 

 we see by the plate, is an ordinary moss-agate, from which the structure of a 

 choanite has disappeared under the effect of mmeralization, and to the unedu- 

 cated eye of the author, dreaming of likenesses instead of tracing out nature, 

 has appeared to bear a vague resemblance to a shell v/hich he has termed, of all 

 things under the sun, a terebratula. 



Neither can we avoid commenting here on the author's very evident want of 

 knowledge of the difPerent characters and conditions presented by the substance 

 of which the objects he pretends to describe are composed, otherwise we should 

 not find him speaking of " quartz-agate," " agatine-siliceous," &c. His know- 

 ledge of mineralogy might surely have been sufficiently improved by a reference 

 to any popular handbook to have saved him from an exposure of his ignorance 

 of the distinctive characteristics of fl.int, chert, chalcedony, agate, carnelian, 

 and quartz. The " silicified parti-coloured madrepore" spoken of at p. G2, and 

 the pebbles " chafed and worn to skeletons" on the Bognor shore (p. 62), must 

 be curiosities indeed worth preserving. 



After our pause at page 17, by an effort we did resume our reading, hoping 

 to find some redeeming qualities for such sad errors. At page 18 are some 

 figures of fossils, amongst them one of the most abundant from the white chalk, 

 which formerly Avas called Spatanpis, and of late years Micmster cor-cmguimim. 

 The prefix to the wood-cut of this is merely cor-anguinum. Was the author in 

 doubt which generic cognomen to take, or can not it be possible he could be 

 ignorant of the proper name of so common an object ? 



With the practical directions contained in the account of " the lapidary's 

 workshop" we were certainly pleased, and regard it as the best written portion 

 of the work. 



The chapter on the contents of a good beach might have been deemed good 

 also, had it been correct ; but when we hint that the author supposes the pre- 

 sence of bitumen in chalk-flints — that he throws his refuse chalcedony -pebbles 

 " into the sea, there to undergo a fresh impregnation" — a strange notion which 

 is repeated at page 65, where he refers to the effects produced by the " crystal- 

 lizing waves" — we shall have done quite enough to expose the shallowness of 

 his miueralogical acquirements. 



Those who read (?) the work wlU find he employs liis mother tongue in a 

 very loose manner iadeed, as this sentence from page 5 wiU exemplify. " But 

 what have I got ? Above thirty globes of chalcedony, blue and white, as oval 

 as bantams' eggs." Although a book upon "pebbles," he rarely if ever uses 

 that word even with its proper meaning, for he confines it merely to denote 

 more or less transparent and parti-coloured siliceous stones. The natural his- 

 tory knowledge displayed is no better than that shown of other departments of 

 science. At page 41, the choanite — a bulbous sponge — is described as 

 "undoubtedly a beautiful creature," and at page 42 as possessing "feelers." 

 At page 43, too, that there might be no mistake about that absurdity, the 

 unfortunate " actinia" is again alluded to as being " of the ' crass' kind" with 

 " tubular tentacles." We puzzled ourselves at first what the " crass" kind of 

 actinia were. Our knowledge of the objects of the sea-shore is not slight : 

 after fivc-and-twenty years residence on the coast, we were tolerably familiar 

 witli most of the " sea-anemones," and yet we did not know the " crass" kind. 

 At last a light struck in upon our reveries, and we suspected " crass" was a 

 slang contraction of " crassicornis." We do not like slang, and there is far too 



