17 
of any unfailing store of land at the South Pole to supply the place of the 
land moving northward. Yet, how is such a return current of land to he 
conceived ? In the face of such difficulties ; such a crumpling together of 
the land in the north ; such a pulling out of the land in the south ; such an 
utter lack of information as to where the land goes to, and from whence it 
comes : how, I ask, can we receive this theory of a spiral motion of the 
earth’s crust ? It is simply incredible, because of the mechanical difficulties 
necessarily involved, which mechanical difficulties would seem to have been 
altogether overlooked. Whoever, then, maintains this theory to be the true 
one, is bound to tell us how it is that the land coming from the south first 
occupies an immensely larger surface as it approaches the Equator, and then 
an immensely smaller one as it proceeds further north ; what becomes of it 
when it reaches the North Pole, and whence it came from at the South ; and, 
further, to give proof that such changes as these are, in fact, now taking 
place. It seems, then, that this idea of a spiral motion must be given up. 
Must we say, in consequence, that there is no motion in the surface of the 
earth to account for the observed astronomical changes ? In making a hypo- 
thesis, we are bound to account for the facts of the case. Some motion 
there must be somewhere which accounts for these astronomical changes. 
What motion, we may ask, would account for this ? If the whole surface of 
the earth were simply revolving round, not spirally towards the North Pole, 
but in a plane inclined to the Equator — that is, half towards the north-west 
and half towards the south-east — these changes of latitude and longitude 
would at once be accounted for, and this without any crushing together or 
pulling out of the land, or getting land from no one knows where ; but to do 
this the motion must not be, as I say, a spiral one from south to north, but 
one of simple revolution in an inclined plane to the Equator. Such a motion 
will account for the facts of the case. Now observe, if we take this view, 
what follows. We have no longer a motion of the whole earth’s surface to 
the north-west, but we have half the surface moving to the north-west, and 
half to the south-east ; since, if the motion going on the whole way round, 
is of the nature of a revolution, each joint of the surface must eventually 
come back again to where it at first stood. It seems, therefore, that 
the only motion of the earth’s crust which will account for this astrono- 
mical phenomenon (if in this way it can be accounted for) is a re- 
volution of the entire crust, as of a hollow sphere, without crushing 
together and breaking, and that such motion must of necessity return 
upon itself. It is impossible to twist a revolving sphere in such a way 
that at last every point shall not return to its original place, that is 
always supposing you do not disturb the substance of the sphere itself. 
But if this is the case, how will it tally with the facts alleged as to changes 
of climates ? Mr. Hopkins gives England as an example ; and we can well 
suppose that England, moving in this way, was once in a much hotter climate 
than now — a tropical latitude, if you will. Then he takes another case, 
Greenland, and another, Australia. But it is simply impossible, on this view 
of the motion of the earth’s crust, for all these three parts of the globe to have 
YOL. II. C 
