I’AUT 3.] 
Theuluhl: The Kumcmn Lukes, 
1G5 
size and cliaractor of the materials composing it. To no such origin as this can, 
I think, any of the barriers of the Kninaun lakes be attributed. ‘ Slips’ of the 
second class, however, far more closely simulate a ‘ moraine,’ but those possessed 
of most mobility, from the greater fluidity of their composition, are in the precise 
ratio of such fluidity least ca])ablc of withstanding removal by rain, or of boa,r- 
ing upon their surface craggy masses of rock such as 1 should tm-m ‘erratics,’ 
and which, if not numerous, are at all events occasional and most signifi¬ 
cant constituents of some of the barriers. Mr. Ball mentions masses of rock 
10 feet in diameter, as forming part of the barrier of Naini Tal, but this is an 
under-estimate, as some of the masses are double and treble that size. They have 
certainly not fallen from any neighbouring cliff, nor are the harsh comminuted 
rocks in the vicinity of the lake capable of forming a stiff mud on which they 
could have been transported, after the fashion of a ‘moraine, ’ and the inference 
I therefore draw from them is, that they arc really part of a ‘ moraine ’ and not 
brought into their present position by any of the ordinary modes of .stream action. 
Of Bhim Tal, Mr. Ball’s account is hardly more satisfactory, in my opinion, 
than in the case of Naini, with the important exception, that he himself sees a seid- 
ous objection to the application to it of the ‘ landslijJ ’ theory. Mr. Ball’s woi'ds 
are : “ Towards the southern end of the lake on the eastern side, there is a boulder 
deposit, which extends along the bank, up to a level of porhajjs 10 feet above the 
water.” Now, this ^‘boulder deposit’' is, according to my interpi’ctation, part of a 
lateral moraine which descended from the jjeak above Sangri (6,320 feet), and in 
conjunction with that of the main glacier to the south, helped on the diminution 
of glacial conditions lo block the direct exit of the valley to the south, thereby 
creating the lake. Mr. Ball goes on to add: “ The most remarkable feature about 
it, however, is, that it is backed by no high range on the east, so that, if derived 
from a landslip, the materials must have come from the west, and of necessity 
temporarily filled up a portion of the bed of the lake.’’ I do not see by what 
stretch of ingenuity Mr. Ball can defend the above sentence from the charge 
of very inadequately conveying the true state of the case. The course of the 
lake, so far a.s the “ boulder deposit ” extends, runs north and south. As there is 
no high ground to the east, the material, as ilr. Ball owns, if the boulder deposit 
originated in any way in a landslip, must have come from the west across the 
lake, but in so doing must have obliterated it altogether. To talk of this as tem¬ 
porarily filling up a portion of its bed is sim 2 dy trifling with the intelligence of 
the reader. There being no scour, how does Mr. Ball sujopose such a mass of 
materials to have been removed, and the bed of the lake cleared of its temijorary 
obstruction ? 
Mr. Ball is further forced into the admission, very remarkable in his mouth, 
wdth reference to this “ boulder deposit,” that “ its appearance suggests a moraine,” 
though this is not very consistent with the appellation he bestows on it. 
In considering, too, the question of the descent of a glacier down the valley 
from the north-west, Mr. Ball allows himself to be influenced by a difficulty 
which I confess I am far too dull to perceive the force of. So far as T can under- 
.stand it, the difficulty, as it presents itself to him, i.s the possible or probable 
