146 
that the element of time has very little share in the alteration and crystallisa- 
tion of the sedimentary rock .” (Hear, hear.) I quote this to show that (as 
our Chairman has said) the tendency of the latest scientific conclusions is to 
reverse not only the theory of distinct creations, hut also that of the long 
geological periods which Dr. Gladstone and Mr. Warington have both so 
confidently appealed to. But these are questions we shall have to investi- 
gate. We are yet but a young society, and perhaps we have all been too 
eaoer to dispose of such large questions off-hand, in the course of the two 
discussions which as yet are all we have had. I, for one, do not admit that 
these long periods and the great antiquity of the sedimentary rocks have 
been proved. Dr. Burnett has furnished us with some fresh matter for 
consideration ;* but his paper must not be considered as laying even at- 
tempted to settle so large a question. It is to be hoped that it will lead to 
other papers, in which the various points raised by him will be more 
minutely discussed. It was, in fact, with that object that these introductory 
papers had been written and read as a commencement of our Transactions. 
TheBev.Dr. Irons.— While there are some things in the paper to which we 
mitdit demur, I feel that Dr. Burnett is not the less entitled to our most cordia 
thanks. I should like to know whether it is probable that the paper wd 
come on for discussion at another meeting. I think it would he desirable 
that an opportunity should he given us to discuss it at some future time 
after we have read and weighed its contents. And I think that nothing m 
more essential to the character of the Institute as a philosophical Society, 
than that we should eschew all unnecessary bickering between science and 
religion. We are here engaged in the pursuit of truth, and our duty is to 
examine the arguments of those who are opposed to us, and to eliminate as 
much as possible all merely controversial disputes. (Hear.) 
Mr Burnett.— I should like to say a few words before the meeting closes, 
upon 'the observations which have been made. Of course the paper was 
intended to meet with criticism. My father would have been very much 
disappointed if it had not been criticised; and I am glad to find that 
it has given rise to as much discussion as if he had been present, 
respect to the critical objections of Mr. Warington, I have only to say that 
my father is perfectly aware of the defects of his paper, hut his illness had 
prevented him from producing a more complete essay at present. (Hear, 
hear.) I beg to thank the meeting for the kind manner in which it has 
listened to me, and for the cordial vote of thanks which has been passed for 
my father’s paper. (Hear.) 
The Chairman then adjourned the meeting. 
* Some of his arguments are similar in character to those so a %P^t 
forward in Omphalos by our Vice-President, Mr. Gosse. rormstaneeifwe 
admit creation at all, say of a tree or an animal, it is evident that such tree 
or animal would appear as if it had slowly grown . t» tvme te .be wM it ^ 
which appearance would, in the case supposed, be deceptive. I his is 
difficulty which inductive science must face. Whereas, if men deny crea , 
they are then involved in greater difficulties of another kind. 
