1885.] 
The Form of the Earth. 323 
assumed that whilst it was in this fluid state it began to 
rotate on its axis. Then, on the suppositions above named, 
the rotation of the Earth would cause the sphere thus 
rotating to become a spheroid, and to become flattened at 
the Poles, and to have a longer diameter at the Equator 
than at the Poles. An air ball is then made to rotate 
rapidly, and as it does so it assumes a spheroidal form ; and 
this experiment is supposed to be a proof of the Earth being 
spheroidal in form. A geometrical proof, however, was 
needed, and this pi oof was that a degree measured in any 
meridian near the Equator was shorter than a degree mea- 
sured near the Poles. In order to obtain evidence of this 
nature, astronomers and surveyors were employed in various 
parts of the world to measure arcs of the meridian, and it 
has been stated these observers proved by their measure- 
ments that the length of a degree near the Equator was 
shorter than a degree near the Pole. And this problem is 
now considered to have been solved without the slightest 
possibility of error. 
With regard to the last-named evidence it may probably 
surprise some of our readers when it is stated, first, that the 
astronomers and surveyors did not prove what it is stated 
they did prove ; and, secondly, that at the time the observa- 
tions were made the class of instruments used were such 
that these observers could not prove what it is claimed they 
did prove. 
If we now examine this problem critically, we find that it 
is first based on two theories. It has been assumed that 
the Earth was once in a fluid state. The evidence on which 
this theory is based is very questionable. We must not 
therefore accept this theory as an established faCt. Was 
the Moon once in a fluid state ? if so, when did it begin to 
solidify ? for it is certainly solid now, at least on its surface. 
If the Earth were once in a fluid state, and heated, and then 
cooled down, the surface that had cooled down would show 
evidence of contraction, and we should find evidence of this 
contraction in the “ faults ” in strata and mineral veins. 
All the faults, however, as is well known to miners, give 
exactly the opposite evidence. If a fault be found in any 
vein, the continuation of that vein is never found in the 
position it would occupy if the Earth’s surface had con- 
tracted, and the fault had been produced by contraction. 
Thus if A B be a portion of the Earth’s surface, f g a fault, 
M 0 a vein of metal, the vein disappearing at 0 in the fault, 
the continuation of this vein will be found at p, or at some 
point between 0 and f, and is never found to be continued 
