of Edinburgh, Session 1863 - 64 . 
145 
though not affecting a single point of doctrine or morals, or the 
essentials of history — they say the hooks ascribed to Moses are 
devoid of authority, and must be abandoned ! 
That is not the way in which we are accustomed to read any 
ancient history ; and, though different canons are used for criti- 
cising the inspired writers from those applied to other historians, 
yet, as to the mere text, the books of Moses are entitled beyond 
others to a fair and liberal construction, as the most ancient books 
in the world, and as having passed through an infinite number of 
transcriptions and translations. 
But I must declare my entire concurrence with Dr Hannah, that 
“ it is a dangerous and mistaken policy to raise these disputes to 
adventitious importance, by treating them as though they neces- 
sarily involved the issue of our highest interests.” 
For the persons of tender conscience, who feel themselves con- 
strained “ to build up those scattered fragments of difficulty into a 
coherent edifice of doubt,” they would themselves surely feel easier, 
as it would be a relief to the world, who are judging in the quarrel, 
if they could cease to be members of a Church which founds so 
confidently on the Mosaical history. They would assail with more 
satisfaction if they had not promised to defend. 
For the geologist, if my voice were wanting to encourage him, 
I would bid him go forward, cautiously, reverently, yet without 
fear. Let him test the evidence with all care before publishing a 
discovery. He must consider he has everything to prove, and he 
should assert nothing without evidence, and take nothing for 
granted. We want proof of the antiquity of the Drift-deposit, and 
of the fossils contained in it belonging to the extinct animals 
named. We want proof that the flints are hand- wrought, and not 
chipped accidentally in the rolling drift. Much more, we desire 
proof that they were found there, and not 'placed to be found by 
some cunning quarryman. It is not only the flint instrument but 
its manufacture, its chipping into shape, that must be tested. Is 
the fracture of the flint such that it might have been made many 
thousand years ago ? 
Farther, the geologist should publish to the world the evidence 
of his facts ; for the inquiry is one that concerns the public, and in 
VOL. V. 
T 
