NOTES AND QUERIES. 



353 



much of the affair as to induce them to take that trouble. Had they helieved that 

 geologists and scientific men, to free themselves from the trouble of attempting 

 to account for the phenomenon, or fi-om disinclination to abandon ideas and 

 prejudices which exist in their minds, would prefer to deny the truth of the 

 discovery entirely, they would have taken pains to have had the place well ex- 

 amined by practised observers — for the stones and everything connected Avith the 

 circumstance were perfectly accessible, and were visited by all who chose for 

 several weeks afterwards. 



Scientific men, who have been referred to, seem to have great difiiculty in this 

 case. The facts so completely militate against all the theories of science in 

 general, that rather than attempt to account for this or take any trouble to 

 inquire further into the matter, they prefer to denounce the whole as a fabrication, 

 and the discoverers impostors. Of course, such a conclusion as that would settle 

 the whole aftair most satisfactorily to their o\vn minds : but to those who, like 

 myself, are willing to believe in the veracity of the discoverers, some other 

 solution is necessary ; and 1 confess I see less difiiculty in considering the frog as 

 co-eval with the freestone than in crediting the existence of "backs and cutters," 

 or air holes and fissures of such a nature as to have allowed the said animal to 

 have got into the cavity lately, because it is necessary to fix some probable or 

 possible data for its finding its way to the place. Besides, the vei-y fact of spawn 

 (did such a "cutter" exist I'ight through every seam of coal, ironstone, freestone, 

 &c.) not findmg a crevice or cavity of some sort or another till a depth of 

 ninety yards, in which the frog could be generated, appears to me to be far more 

 improbable or impossible than the facts which geologists condemn as absurd. 



I shall be glad if the scientific world in general would take up the consideration 

 of this subject, and investigate into the case for themselves. I shall be happy to 

 give or to obtam any further information that mav be directed to vours, &c., 



R. B. Waedlaav Eazmsat, Whitehill. 



"VVe have printed in full the above clearly -wTitt en account of Mr. R. B. W. 

 Ramsay's miners, respecting the living frog found in the Dundonald Colliery, 

 because it is a more definite noticf of such a circumstance than has been usually 

 given. 



Notwithstanding the natural improbability, not to say impossibility, of an 

 I animated being existing for myriads of years, without food or air, mclosed in solid 

 I stone, we constantly hear of frogs being so broken out of rocks free from cracks 

 i and fissures, and as constantly, under the idea that these frogs must be co-eval 

 I with the stone, we have in each case the circumstance tauntingly put to geologists 



as an insurmountable difiiculty to deal with. 



All the frogs hitherto so found inclosed in rocks, ^^■ithout any exception, 

 , have belonged to existing species, and of species living, too, at the surface in the 

 j very district of the supposed discovery. Now, the batrachian reptiles of the coal- 

 I measures belong to that peculiar class styled labyrinthodonts ; and, as no existing 

 1 reptiles are, by all the evidences of geology, of older date, at most, than the later 

 ! Tertiaries, it follows that imless the so-called inclosed animals possess labyrin- 



thodont characters, they must be of recent birth. 



The whole question of whether fi-ogs can exist inclosed in solid substances and 

 i deprived of air, has been thoroughly gone into by Geologists. The late Dr. 

 I Buckland proved beyond doubt that frogs would not exist for any considerable time 

 I inclosed in blocks of stone; but in his experiments, (see Geol. Journ., Vol. V., p. 

 I 313. Ed. New Phil. Journ., Vol. XIII., p. 26. SiUiraans American Journal, Vol. 

 I II , p. 272. Isis, 1834', Vol. X., p. 988,) it was evident that air was necessary for 



the frog's existence. They would live for some time inclosed in cells of porous 



materials, but in impervious cells they invariably died. 



The distinction, however, of extinct or recent form is quite sufiicient for the 



settlement of the point ; and therefore where evidence is given, as in the instance 



above, of a fact, we have only to see if it can be reasonably accounted for, without 

 j "attempting at aU to invalidate the evidence, which, in the generality of these 

 I cases, we believe to be faithfully recorded up to a certain point of investigation. 

 1 



