Far oftener, however, there is no delinquency on either side, both disputants having done their work honestly and well. One has, perhaps, been more fortunate than the other, and, in the run of events, has the losing game, although no blame can be attributed either to him or his rival.

In the course of the Cambro-Silurian discussions, a great deal has been said and written about a 'natural system' of rockformations. The expression is one familiar to zoologists and botanists, and conveys to them a distinct meaning, and has been used by geologists in what they apparently believe an analogous sense. We question the propriety of adopting this phrase into geological language, and doubt the correctness of the supposed analogy. Animals or plants are said to belong to the same natural group when they are constructed on the same plan or ideal type, and are related to each other through homology, or, in other words, identity of conformation. A natural system in zoology and botany is one that is supposed to co-ordinate in more general relations of affinity the groups or families constituted upon these considerations. Now it is plain that there can be no true analogy between the 'natural systems' of biologists and those which have lately been so designated by geologists, for the latter can mean no more than assemblages of a certain number of organised species within an arbitrarily-assumed portion of geological time. The species so grouped need have no mutual affinities; their tie is one dependent only on the accident of their synchronic creation and their endurance of identical physical conditions. As these conditions are in the main local and limited in their geographical extension, each time-assemblage of species is necessarily local also. When we speak of cretaceous, oolitic, carboniferous, &c., epochs, we refer to divisions of time during each of which certain sedimentary rock-formations were deposited, and we distinguish between these and give them different names, on account of the more or less distinct set of animals and plants which existed between the commencement and conclusion of each of those geological epochs. Experience has shown that biological differences of this nature furnish the only certain basis for the construction of a geological time-scale. All attempts to found one on purely mineralogical considerations have invariably failed, and indeed are now never proposed except by very inexperienced or very antiquated geologists. But whilst laying the strongest stress upon Palæontological facts as foundations of a true classification of geological epochs, we must not overrate them, or forget that all such facts are local, in a greater or less degree according to circumstances. The whole of our geological systems or formations, or whatsoever else we may please

to

to term them, are therefore in their essence limited and topographical, and consequently, until we discover great laws regulating the succession of life-appearances in time, provisional and empirical.

That

But are there no laws looming in the distance? Have none been indicated-none discovered? Are geologists to be the gipsies of science, picturesque denizens of the fields and wilds, lighting their fires and boiling their pots each according to his own fancy, and without regard to rule or authority? We know that not a few of our sober mathematicians and severe astronomers, nay, even thrifty chemists, look upon them as philosophical irregulars and British-Association Bashi-Bazouks. But the Arabs of the Desert had their prophets, and so has geology. Surely Leopold von Buch, so lately taken from amongst us, was one. illustrious man, whose name is one of the glories of Germany, originated an idea which probably contains the germ of a great geological law. He endeavoured to show that each section of logical time might be marked not only by the peculiar set of organic remains belonging to it, the value of whose differences after all must depend upon local arrangements, but by a general and peculiar facies or aspect presented by the whole assemblage of organized beings created within its limits, as if the mighty Maker of all things, delighting in infinite variety and never repeating the same thought or mode of thought, had stamped each age of life with a seal that would distinguish it whilst the fragment of one of its organisms remained. And, practically, at the present moment, whatever be his opinion, whether inclined or adverse to the generalization foreshadowed by Von Buch, the geological observer sets to work almost instinctively to identify formations through that very law. A stranger in a far land that has never been explored brings home a heap of rocks and fossils, and submits them to a geologist with questions about their age. The man of science turns them over one by one, and, although each and every species may be new to him, with little hesitation pronounces on the epoch of the formation from which they were taken. Whether he choose to admit or deny the validity of the doctrine of facies of epochs, he, in this instance, which is an everyday occurrence, acts as if he had implicit faith in the belief. We remember once sitting in an Eastern court of justice, and watching, with much curiosity, the proceedings of the Cadi who was judge. One man accused another of stealing his artichokes and selling them in the market. There was hard swearing on both sides, and it was very difficult to guess which was the iar. Witnesses were balanced, and to all appearance equally respectable. The Cadi looked grave, pondered, and called for the

artichokes.

artichokes. One by one he counted them out from the basket, and then unhesitatingly gave his verdict for the plaintiff, and hurried away the accused to be severely bastinadoed. We were curious to know the reason for this prompt decision, and through an influential friend put the question to the Cadi. His answer was simple and plain: When men,' he said, bring their own artichokes to our market, they cut their heads and do not break them off; these artichokes were all broken.' The story has not much to do with geology, yet may serve to illustrate the process by which the geologist comes to his decision about the age of rocks. As the Cadi judged of the history of the artichokes by their aspect, so does the Palæontologist pronounce upon the fossils set before him.

The name by which any formation characterised by the presence of peculiar fossil contents is to be called must, in a great measure, depend on the views of the geologist who has to speak or write about it. Its acceptance will depend on its usefulness. A mere number would do as well as a word, were our knowledge of the series of formations complete, but, not being so, a word has to be employed. At present the nomenclature of geological formations is oddly miscellaneous, and derived from the most heterogeneous combinations and sources. A tribe of ancient

Britons have supplied the epithet Silurian; regions where the beds so designated are especially fossiliferous, or rock-strewn, furnish the terms Devonian and Permian. The abundance of coal in strata of middle palæozoic age suggests the name of Carboniferous, although any coal-bearing sedimentary formation would furnish the same character. Because our British clodpoles could not talk of layers' of clay and marl without contorting the word into liars,' a series of strata, widely diffused through the world, has received the name of Lias. The euphony of the word seems to have suggested to the Germans the term 'Trias' given by them to the formation that follows: not, however, wholly without a meaning, for the term is ingeniously contrived to suggest at the same time the triple division of the Teutonic Trias into 'keuper,' 'muschelkalk,' and 'bunter sandstein.' This same Trias has been also designated 'poikolitic,' because certain of the marls composing it are often conspicuously parti-coloured,—a feature, however, frequently presented by marls of all ages having a similar mineral character. It rejoices, besides, in two more names, viz. Saliferous,' because rock-salt is found abundantly in it in several localities, and "Upper New Red Sandstone,' to distinguish it from the Lower New Red Sandstone,' which is the Permian. There are numerous red sandstones greatly newer than either.

The 'oolites '

are

6

are so called because some well-known building-stones belonging to the series are made up of minute pea-like particles; but at similar structure is met with in both older and new rocks. Such terms as Cornbrash, Oxford and Kimmeridge clay, Portland and Purbeck stones, betray at once their local and provincial origin, but sound oddly enough when converted into Oxfordien, Kimmeridgien, Portlandien, and Purbeckien. Lower Green Sands' and Upper Green Sands' need neither be sandy nor green; it suffices for the geologist that they are deposits of a certain age. 6 White chalk' may be yellow, or green, or black, and is actually of these colours in some places, but, notwithstanding these stains upon its character, is still called 'white' by courtesy. 'Eocene' seemed a happy thought when first employed, but the dawn of new things had before very long to be referred to an earlier time of the geological day. Pliocene' was scarcely christened before a 'newer pliocene' and a 'pleistocene' sprang up. Geologists who repudiate the Noachian deluge continue to write about diluvium. In fact, each term, whether constant to its original meaning or contradictory of it, becomes an independent word or sign, the literal signification of which is rapidly set aside, and a new conventional sense given to it. It serves its purpose in the mean time, and what more can we desire? All growing sciences are prolific in discussions about nomenclature, and generate debates that wax warm through the very earnestness of the disputing philosophers. Geologists are reputed to be especially disputatious, and to make war on each other with a verbal ferocity alarming to their unlearned hearers and readers. It is said that a brave old soldier, a visitor for the first time at a geological meeting, left the room during the heat of disputation rather than be present at a scene that must lead to a challenge. The art of war,' writes the usually unintelligible Oken, is the highest, most exalted art-the principle of Peace; and certainly the end of geological wars is hearty good fellowship and co-operation. The old Scandinavian gods amused themselves all day in their Valhalla hacking each other to small pieces, but, when the time of feasting came, sat down together entire and harmonious, all their wounds healed and forgotten. Our modern Thors, the hammer-wielders of science, enjoy similar rough sport with like pleasant ending. Men whose work, both of head and hand, is done mainly under the broad sky and along the craggy sides of mountains, heedless of weather and toil, are not likely to use mincing forms of speech, or mollify their sentiments when engaged in discussions, though all the time mildness and mercy are at the foundations of their thoughts. Better men and truer, whether in

field or council, there are not living than the two famous geologists, the nature of whose difference we have endeavoured to expound. They have worked long and well in co-operation, heart and hand united; and though the fortune of scientific war has led in the end to the crossing of their pens, the names of Sedgwick and Murchison will go down to posterity side by side, and bracketed together in the glorious list of benefactors of mankind through the advancement of science.

Second

ART. V.-1. The Life and Times of Oliver Goldsmith. By John Forster, of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. edition. 2 vols. 8vo. London, 1854.

2. The Works of Oliver Goldsmith. Edited by Peter Cunningham. 4 vols. 8vo. London, 1854.

MR.

R. CUNNINGHAM, whose scrupulous exactness is generally known, has furnished the first complete and accurate reprint of the miscellaneous writings of Oliver Goldsmith. Numerous errors which had crept into previous editions are corrected, omitted passages are restored, and entire pieces have been added.* By a fortunate coincidence Mr. Forster at the same moment has reproduced, with great additions, his wellknown 'Life of Goldsmith,' in which he has collected, from an infinity of sources, every particular which could illustrate the career of his hero, and by his acute and genial comments has assigned to the mass of disjointed facts their true significance. Much as has been written upon the man, and often as his works have been republished, we have now a better opportunity for forming a thorough acquaintance with both than has been afforded us before.

There was an anomaly in Goldsmith's character which has existed in no other celebrated personage in an equal degree. An Irishman by birth, he had most of the virtues and not a few of the failings which distinguish many of his nation-their love of low festivities, their blundering, their gullibility, their boastfulness, their vanity, their improvidence, and, above all, their hospitality and benevolence. But with this Hibernian disposition he was an author after the purest and soberest models-chaste in his style and language, and calm and rational in his opinions. Those who lived with him found it hard to believe that one so

* The new edition of the works of Goldsmith forms part of a series of the British Classics, which is undoubtedly the best selected and edited, the cheapest, and the handsomest that as ever ssue from the press.

weak