magnetism which Mr. Hopkins supposes is the cause. But magnetism may not be the cause, but the result, of the operation. It is tolerably clear that there has been a motion in the crust of the earth-that is undeniable; and what Mr. Warington has said with respect to Syria is rather the exception to the rule, and may be accounted for just as Mr. Mitchell has been explaining. Mr. REDDIE.—It is somewhat unfortunate, my lord, that Mr. Hopkins, the author of the paper read this evening, has not been able to be present himself to defend it. But I may venture to say this, that I am sure he will be extremely obliged to Mr. Warington for his valuable criticisms. It was never intended that this paper should be accepted here, as absolutely solving the great difficulties that there unquestionably are as regards what is called "the precession of the equinoxes," whether we endeavour to account for them by the motion of the earth's axis, or the motion of the whole crust of the earth. I am afraid Captain Fishbourne was assuming the point at issue in taking for granted that the apparent alteration in the position of the streets of Philadelphia, and in the orientation of churches, must be caused solely by the motion of the crust of the earth. It would be equally explained by what astronomers have given as the cause-(at least, if I cannot say equally explained, I may say that it would be approximately so explained); but then what Mr. Hopkins rests upon, in favour of his view as against the astronomical one, is the existence of those other facts which do appear to afford the proofs of a change of climate having taken place in different parts of the earth, and which Mr. Warington has entirely passed over. Of course it was no part of Mr. Warington's duty to meet the other side of the case, so to speak ; but at the same time, we must not forget that he did only meet one side of it. He did not account for the remains of tropical plants and animals found in Portland and Sheppey, and in the present latitude of London; and he took no notice of the change of climate in Greenland, as Mr. Mitchell has pointed out. Mr. Hopkins, however, will no doubt himself reply to the most important parts of Mr. Warington's criticisms, especially as regards the exact degree of obliquity of this supposed motion. I believe there has been a slight misunderstanding about it, but nothing that Mr. Hopkins will not either satisfactorily explain, or admit to be unaccounted for. We now come to consider those parts of Mr. Warington's observations which, as it were, lie within themselves, or the supposed mechanical difficulties of the theory. I scarcely think he has quite established that these difficulties which were to him so great, as to this necessary crumpling and crushing, are any objection to the hypothesis now advanced. Because the obvious result of such crushing would be the raising up of the earth's crust at one place and its depression at another, and these Mr. Warington will not deny to be geological facts; for even when we go to Palestine he tells us of an upheaval there. Now, Mr. Warington is quite right, that if the earth is being twisted round, and a larger quantity of its solid crust is compressed into a smaller space, there will be this crushing ; but what, on the other hand, will there be if the mountains are upheaved by expanding the surface of the globe? Would there not then be a riving asunder, an opening of the earth's crust, which is not the fact? It appears to

me, these upheavals and depressions without forming gaps in the earth's crust are just the very difficulties in geology that Mr. Hopkins's paper tends to solve. Geological authorities now admit that mere upheaval and depression do not account for the phenomena. In Professor Ramsay's inaugural address to the Geological Section of the British Association he says:—

"In the Alps we find areas half as large as an English county, in which a whole series of formations has been turned upside down. But by what means were masses of strata many thousands of feet thick bent and contorted, and raised into the air, so as to produce such results, and thus affording matter for the elements to work upon? Not by igneous or other pressure and upheaval from below, for that would stretch instead of crumpling the strata in the manner in which we find them, in great mountain-chains like the Alps, or in less disturbed groups like those of the Highlands, Wales, and Cumberland, which are only fragments of older mountain-ranges."

Now, if we regard the earth's crust as a whole, comprising its hills and vales, and in these vales I especially include the great beds of the ocean,-it does not form one rigid smooth plain; and even supposing it to be crushed together or compressed into smaller space, if we consider that it is not level, but formed of materials unequal both in their constitution as regards stiffness and pliability, and also in elevation and depression, the result would be that mountains would be raised higher, while at other places there would be depressions, by means of that very compression. I do not say that this would be the result universally, for we must further consider the slowness of this motion, and the waste of solid material that also takes place in various ways; as, for instance, from the very atmosphere crumbling down even the hardest granite rocks, and from igneous action below; for although we do not hold, I suppose, now, with the igneous theory that we were taught to believe for long time, still we know there is burning going on below some parts of the earth, and a certain amount of solid material is thus disposed of. And even this internal heat, it seems, might be the result of this crushing and jamming together that Mr. Warington finds so difficult to understand. At all events, this subterranean combustion, and the throwing out of materials from below, will make room for the fresh material, to be jammed and crushed together. Of course we know that this paper now puts before a scientific meeting, I think for the first time, a series of views perfectly heretical in geology, and perfectly new, though the facts on which they are based are pretty well known to all; and in my opinion Mr. Hopkins has put forward his hypothesis to account for them very fairly. He has worked at it for many years, and has endeavoured to gain the ear of the public by means of his very valuable work on Terrestrial Magnetism and Geology; and we know that Professor Kirk, when at our request he was kind enough to give us a review of the whole theories of geology, was driven, to a certain extent, to the acceptance of Mr. Hopkins's views, as affording the best explanation of those facts, which neither the igneous nor the aqueous theories, nor the upheavals and subsidences of other theorists, could properly account for. Now, that being the case, at least it is of great consequence that this theory

should be fully discussed, and certainly of the greatest advantage to it that it should be as severely criticised as possible. No one can have any interest in accepting what will not stand criticism; and I have no doubt whatever, that as regards anything requiring a reply in what Mr. Warington has advanced, Mr. Hopkins will be prepared with that reply, or if not, he will acknowledge that Mr. Warington has so far refuted his propositions.

The Meeting was then adjourned.

REPLY BY MR. HOPKINS.

I much regret that a severe illness prevented me from attending the meeting to enable me to reply personally to Mr. Warington's remarks on my paper. I trust, however, that the following observations will suffice to clear up some of the obscurities referred to, and also to remove the misapprehensions under which Mr. Warington appears to be labouring. I was somewhat surprised at Mr. Warington's difficulty in commencing his observations. He could not see how a right-angled triangle having an angle of 231° between the hypothenuse and base, would give a ratio of 50 for the hypothenuse to 20 for the perpendicular. I hope he has since seen that this is correct, as it can be easily proved to be so, and I consider it therefore unnecessary to take further notice of it. In discussing the arguments brought forward in the paper, to prove that the surface of the globe has a motion which shifts the lands from south to north, it is necessary that we should keep our minds entirely free from all preconceived ideas, and restrict our thoughts to the observed conditions or ascertained facts. Now, in examining the lands, we have discovered two primary facts :1stly, that the lands are subject to constant changes; and 2ndly, astronomical observations have proved that there is an annual change in a given direction equal to 50". During the last 2,140 years Alexandria has moved 30° towards the N.W., and has advanced in the same time 12° in latitude north. This is the total amount of the movement founded on actual observations. As this movement is found to be constantly going on at the same rate and the same direction, we may naturally conclude that it has been going on since the days of the creation. Such a superficial movement cannot take place without changing the latitudes and the climates of the shifting lands. Mr. Warington admits the fact "that the latitude had altered to the extent stated;" but he endeavours to maintain "that the alteration of latitude does not involve a change of climate." Mr. Warington remarks, "Granted that the latitudes of Greenland, of England, of Australia, have varied to the extent that he (Mr. Hopkins) says they have, and I am quite prepared to admit it; still this does not involve the change of climate. The latitude has moved, but the climate, we have no ground for

Such an opinion is certainly climate of countries depends

thinking, was thereby altered in the least." extraordinary, as it is well known that the more or less at corresponding elevations on the latitudes, and we have most incontrovertible evidence of the changes which have taken place in Greenland and England as well as in other places. The Icelandic chronicles not only refer to former productions of that island, to forests of birch and fir, and the cultivation of barley and other grain, but also to the forests and the inhabitants of Greenland prior to the Norwegian emigration, and mention the name of a warm and fertile valley (Kirkinbui) near the southern coast. About 1,400 years ago there was a country called Vinland, within a few days' sail of Greenland, watered with rivers yielding abundance of fine salmon, on the banks of which were trees loaded with agreeable fruits, the temperature pleasant, and the soil fertile. Large stumps of the trees of the forests are still seen in Greenland.

The monasteries in the south of Denmark, in the thirteenth century, were confirmed by the papal rescripts in their possession of vineyards. Various documents of the 12th and 13th centuries testify that the wine-grape was grown at that time in the south of England, as was also the case in the north-west part of France (Brittany and Normandy), where it is not cultivated now any more than in England. The climate has become colder, and in this way the vineyards of north-western France and England have vanished, the limit of the vine being driven further south. In the east of Germany the vine-limit was further north formerly, beyond the districts which are now in the parallel of 53°. Mr. Warington does not appear to be aware of these changes, and he ignores the geological facts altogether. He refers to Palestine, and attempts to sustain his views by reference to the botany and zoology of that country, which he positively maintains are now the same as they were of yore. Let us test the correctness of his arguments by the records :

Mr. Warington asks, "Does Biblical evidence show us, that in the days of Moses Palestine was in the tropics?" "The vegetation now observable in Palestine is identical with the vegetation mentioned in the Pentateuch. You have the oak, the terebinth, &c., as the characteristic trees then, just as now; the palm mentioned but seldom, and as found only in certain places, as in the valley of the Jordan, just as at present. In the same way, also, with regard to the zoology of Palestine, we know perfectly well that the plants and animals, the zoology, and botany of the country at the present day are exactly those which the Bible describes." I shall now endeavour to satisfy Mr. Warington on these points, and would draw his attention to the accounts of former tropical productions in Palestine, such as groves of palm-trees and cedar-trees, as well as the balsam; also to the lions, leopards, &c., referred to in the Scriptures. Before, however, I enter into the question connected with the botany and the zoology of the country, I think it necessary to give a general idea of the configuration of the surface. The physical character of Palestine, like that of Ceylon, renders it capable of producing and nourishing all the organic productions of the world. In no other districts of similar

size, with the exception of Ceylon and some parts of the Andes, could the typical flora and fauna of so many distinct regions and zones be brought into such close juxta-position as in Palestine. It contains four regions distinguished by difference of climate, and necessarily different productions. 1st. In the lowest depression along the valley of the Jordan the temperature is from 70° to 80°. 2ndly. On the plains 500 feet high the temperature varies from 65° to 70°. 3rdly. On the table-lands, from 2,000 to 3,000 feet high, the temperature is from 55° to 63°. 4thly. On the mountains of the Lebanon, from 4,000 to 10,000 feet high, the average temperature is about 35°. Hence it will be observed the country must have been capable of producing all the productions of the world, from the tropics to the Alpine regions. The Lebanon ranges are never free from snow. These mountains were over-shadowed with fir and oak trees, and in the valleys below grew magnificent cedars, the latter being tropical trees. The ostrich approached the southern borders. Animals of different climes met in Palestine; but the lions, leopards and panthers have long since disappeared. The lion is a tropical animal. Formerly lions infested Samaria, and frequently attacked the inhabitants. Mr. Warington refers to the killing of a lion in the snow, but seems to forget that the lion was a tropical animal. The palmtree is a very characteristic tropical plant, and is much esteemed for its various productions. Now, the palm-tree and the balsam-tree were two peculiar trees of Judea. The groves of palms were tall and beautiful, and abounded in Judea. Jericho was also celebrated for its palm groves, so that it was termed "the city of palm-trees." Even Bethany was called "the house of dates." At the time of our Saviour there were palm-trees near Jerusalem, as we are told in the Gospel of St. John: "The people took branches of palms, and went forth to meet him." Such a rich display of palm-trees is only seen under a tropical sun. groves have long disappeared from Palestine. The vineyards of Palestine at the present time are not very remarkable for their products. In the days of Moses the vines in the valleys were very prolific, producing several crops of ripe grapes during the year. These continuous crops can only be obtained under a tropical sun. Be ye of good courage, and bring of the fruit of the land. Now the time was the time of the first ripe grapes. And they came into the brook of Eschol, and cut down from thence a branch with one cluster of grapes, and they bore it between two upon a staff.” "As to the ripe fruit, let them carry that which is ripe first of all into the temple." In the tropics several crops of ripe grapes are obtained from the same vine within the year. The country bordering the lake of Gennesareth was formerly very remarkable for its varied productions. Josephus states "there are palmtrees also, which grow best in hot air; fig-trees also and olives grow near them. One may call this place the ambition of nature: it is a happy contention of the seasons, as if every one of these plants laid claim to this country. It not only nourishes different sorts of autumnal fruit beyond men's expectation, but preserves them a great while; it supplies men with the principal fruits, with grapes and figs continually during ten months of the year, and

66

The palm