552 Notices of Boohs . [October, 
melting wax, and a milk-white colour. No appearance of crystal- 
lisation was detected, even under the microscope. 
There is one lesson to be drawn from this book which should 
on no account be overlooked. Copies of the “ Narrative ” have 
been forwarded, gratuitously and unsolicited, to universities, to 
learned societies, and public libraries, as well as to scientific 
journalists like ourselves, over the whole civilised world. By such 
adbs of munificence the Government of the United States sets an 
example to its neighbours which we are sorry to see finds but 
very scanty imitation. Will England ever learn to “ Americanise 
her institutions ” in this respedt ? 
Scepticism in Geology , and the Reasons for it. By Verifier. 
London : John Murray. 
To this book a preliminary objection maybe taken, serious, if not 
absolutely fatal. The author’s ostensible position, as declared in 
his title and in his preface, is that of the sceptic — using the word 
of course in its philosophical and only legitimate sense. .He 
seledts as his motto the “ Ama nesciri ” of Thomas a Kempis. 
He calls for more thorough demonstration than geologists have 
in his opinion been able to furnish hitherto in support of their 
theories. Far be it from us to question his right to assume such 
an attitude, provided it be done really and consistently. Like 
every other science, Geology must be prepared to submit her con- 
clusions to full and impartial criticism. She can claim our assent 
merely on condition of producing valid evidence. But what is 
scepticism ? It is the dismissal of all preconceived notions 
bearing upon the question at issue ; the refusal to accept without 
proof any proposition whatever, joined to complete indifference 
what conclusion may be arrived at provided it be in accordance 
with the logical interpretation of established fadts. To give a 
familiar illustration, it is the frame of mind which the judge often 
explicitly enjoins the jurymen in cases which have excited a con- 
siderable amount of public feeling. They are told to dismiss all 
prejudices either for or against the prisoner, and utterly to ignore 
everything save the evidence which has been presented to them 
in court. This is true scepticism. But there is a pseudo-scep- 
ticism, very common among the opponents of what are called 
“ modern scientific theories,” which is combined with the grossest 
credulity, and which is in fadt merely a consequence of the latter 
feeling. John Nokes doubts very strongly that a = b, and consi- 
ders that in calling for additional evidence he is assuming the 
position of a sceptic. But what if all his doubts spring merely 
from a strong preconceived notion — not, let us bear in mind, 
resting upon any evidence — that a is not equal to hi He is then 
no sceptic, but a dogmatist in disguise. Such, we are sorry to 
