18 
tradictory to the Mosaic Cosmogony, has since been abundantly 
proved. Yet many persons at one time professed to agree with 
Professor Sedgwick, and freely “ interpreted " the Scriptures to 
make out a kind of agreement between them and the then cur- 
rent geological theories. But the thing did not last. After the 
publication of “ The Yestiges of Creation/' any such pretence of 
agreement was really absurd ; and Mr. Goodwin's Essay and 
lastly Dr. Colenso's writings have since cleared this quite 
awav. 
Dean Cockburn asked for a second discussion, as he got 
no answer from Professor Sedgwick. Professor Ansted 
replied, that he was directed by the Committee of the section 
to say, “ that, as there is no precedent for re-opening the dis- 
cussions of the section, they consider it would not be proper 
for them to comply with the request." What an answer for 
an ee Association for the Advancement of Science " to give. No 
precedent, and therefore “ not proper ! " “ No precedent," m 
1844, given as a reason by an Association then only in its 
14th year ! Well might the learned Dean be excused for 
observing : c< Wliether this refusal arose from a lofty or an 
humble opinion of their cause, it left the question of their Chris- 
tianity where it was." He also asked that the Geological 
Society should ff put forth cx co.thedra a printed statement oi 
their opinions respecting the Creation; " and at last Professor 
Sedgwick sent him a reply. In it, the Professor however f f de- 
clined to support the nebulous theory ! " He said, u that it was 
first put forth by astronomers and adopted by the geologists, as 
a matter of indifference to them whether true or false." Surely 
nothing could be very much stranger than such an account 
of the acceptance of any scientific hypothesis whatever. 
“ Adopted by geologists, as a matter of indifference to them 
whether true or false ! " But nevertheless adopted ; and, as 
already said, to this day exhibited as a foundation of “ the 
geology of the earth" in every current text-book of geological 
science. 
Further correspondence took place between the Professor 
and the Dean. But the former would not consent that his 
letters should, be published. Of the last of these the learned 
Dean writes : iC I wish you would allow me to publish it. It 
has no appearance of hasty composition, but is evidently the 
work of an able writer perfectly conversant with his subject. 
It would, I doubt not, give complete satisfaction to the 
members of the Geological Society. But, unfortunately, there 
are thousands who think with me, that that society have had 
too much respect for the argumentum ad verecundiam , „ and 
have never allowed their own unbiassed judgment to investi- 
