33 
that is meant, then that will only still further show how very uncertain, 
after all, even the quasi “ facts ” of science sometimes are, as well as the 
scientific “ theories ” that thus get upset by fresh investigations. Mr. Evan 
Hopkins, in reference to these words of Mr. Hamilton, says “ The primary 
crystalline rocks are formed in parallel vertical bands, not stratified, but 
divided in plates like crystals. . . . The distinction that exists between 
the semi-crystalline vertical bands of the primary series, and the stratified, 
sedimentary rocks, is not yet fully recognized.”* 
4. As Mr. Hopkins was one of the first, if not, rather, the very first 
geologist who disputed the “ plutonic,” or dry-heat origin of the granites, in 
the first edition of his valuable and interesting work, which was written in 
South America so far back as 1837-38, and published in London in 1843, he 
is entitled to a deferential hearing upon this cognate point. But my object 
throughout this pamphlet, and with reference to all the questions of science 
alluded to in it, is not to show that this or that has been u established ” in 
any case, but to show how scientific opinions have changed, and that further 
investigations are necessary before we can boast we have got hold of any real 
science at all. I find it necessary to say this much, as one or two gentlemen 
have managed to persuade themselves that I have necessarily adopted the 
opinions expressed in some of the citations and references in the text (which 
might or might not be true, and yet be of no consequence), but which is not 
really warranted by the language I have used, and not at all necessary for my 
argument. I have quoted recognized authorities in science against Bishop 
Colenso, Dr. Temple, and Mr. Goodwin ; and I have quoted men whose 
views in science were despised, and who were refused a hearing at one time, 
but whose views are now accepted, as so far correct, by such authorities. 
5. I go on, therefore, to make one more citation from Mr. Hamilton’s 
Address, with reference to other changes in geological views : — 
cc We are daily becoming more convinced that no real natural breaks exist 
between the Faunas and the Floras of what we are accustomed to call geological 
periods. ... We learn now that those forms of animal life which roamed 
over the surface of the earth before man came to exercise dominion over them, 
were not, as was at one time supposed, destroyed before his arrival, but 
continued to coexist with him, until the time came when they were to make 
way for other forms, more suited to the new conditions of life and to his 
requirements.” 
This,' it will be observed, bears upon the remarks in the text (p. 12), made 
in allusion to Sir Charles Lyell’s “Antiquity of Man.” But, again, I beg leave 
to say I am not adopting Mr. Hamilton’s opinions any more than Sir Charles 
Lyell’s upon this point. Were I to express my own opinion, I would venture 
to say that, though I hold it to be clearly proved (as now acknowledged by 
these eminent geologists) that man was contemporaneous with animals at one 
time supposed to have been destroyed ages before his “ arrival ” on the scene 
* Geology and Terrestrial Magnetism. By Evan Hopkins, C.E., F.G.S., 3rd 
Ed., with a new Introduction and Appendix, &c., p. vii. (London : Taylor & 
Francis, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street, 1865.) 
