648 Notices of Books . [September, 
Though holding very positively the belief that the interior of 
our globe is in a state of igneous fusion, he does not appear to 
accept the nebular hypothesis, since he repeatedly speaks of the 
earth being first “ launched into space ” and likewise suggests 
that it may have existed for ever. 
Descending to matters more closely connected with daily life, 
we find Mr. Hughes adopting the theory, first broached, we 
believe, by Prof. Hull, that the seams of coal formerly occurring 
in Ireland have been transferred to Britain ! That the central 
limestone plain of Ireland was once covered over with car- 
boniferous beds, so that these strata have been gradually 
denuded by the adtion of water and other agencies we do not 
dispute. It seems to us, however, that if a region of coal-seams, 
intersedled and separated from each other by beds of shales, 
sandstones, &c., were carried, little by little, into the adjoining 
ocean, and there deposited, we should not find them there re- 
arranged in distindi layers. Coal, shale and grit-stones would 
be all comminuted and blended together in confusion. Prof. 
Hull, it must not be forgotten, only gives a questioning adhesion 
to this wild hypothesis, since he speaks of the Irish strata as 
forming “ perhaps some of the strata which were being piled up 
over the ocean-bed of the British area.” What good cause can 
be shown that the British coal-seams were not formed from 
vegetable matter in situ ? 
What shall we say of this passsge : “ All his (Voltaire’s) 
ingenuity was employed to oppose the Mosaic account of the 
creation and the deluge ; for instance, he asserts that the shells 
discovered in Alpine regions are simple freaks of nature, or else 
they were carried thither by pilgrims from Syria; therefore, so 
much for the opinions of men of science of the last century.” 
Although we can by no means recognise Voltaire as a true man 
of science, and though we consider his explanations of fossil 
shells as utterly groundless, we must remember that the former 
of them was shared by many orthodox divines, and that neither 
of them is more outrageous than their ascription to the Noachian 
deluge, or than the hypothesis advanced by a man of science 
still living that they are forgeries, divinely perpetrated to lead 
vain man into error. If Mr. Hughes will search he will find that 
the eighteenth century is rich in illustrious men of science. 
We are by no means disposed to deal severely with inelcgancies 
and inaccuracies of expression so long as they do not obscure 
an author’s meaning. Still, such utterances as “ I have added 
an addenda,” “ an isolated strata,” &c., rather grate upon our 
feelings. What, too, must the classical scholar think of the 
subjoined rendering : — “ eocene, miocene, pliocene and, post- 
pliocene, all compounded of Greek words signifying ‘ earliest 
new,’ ‘ less new,’ * more new,’ and ‘ often more new.’ ” 
We very much regret that in the interests of science we can- 
not give this book our recommendation. 
