Note xix. § 117.

Transportation of Materials by the Sea.

369. The existence of the great and extensive operations, by which the spoils of the land are carried all over the ocean, and spread out on the bottom of it, may be supposed to require some further elucidation. We must attend, therefore, to the following circumstances.

When the detritus of the land is delivered by the rivers into the sea, the heaviest parts are deposited first, and the lighter are carried to a greater distance from the shore. The accumulation of matter which would be made in this manner on the coast, is prevented by the farther operation of the tides and currents, in consequence of which the substances deposited continue to be worn away, and are gradually removed farther from the land. The reality of this operation is certain; for otherwise we should have on the sea shore a constant and unlimited accumulation of sand and gravel, which, being perpetually brought down from the land, would continually increase on the shore, if nature did not employ some machinery for removing the advanced part into the sea, in proportion to the supply from behind.

The constant agitation of the waters, and the declivity of the bottom, are no doubt the causes of this gradual and widely extended deposition. A soft mass of alluvial deposit, having its pores filled with water, and being subject to the vibrations of a superincumbent fluid, will yield to the pressure of that fluid on the side of the least resistance, that is, on the side toward the sea, and thus will be gradually extended more and more over the bottom. This will happen not only to the finer parts of the detritus, but even to the grosser, such as sand and gravel. For suppose that a body of gravel rests on a plane somewhat inclined, at the same time that it is covered with water to a considerable depth, that water being subject not only to moderate reciprocations, but also to such violent agitation as we see occasionally communicated to the waters of the ocean; the gravel, being rendered lighter by its immersion in the water, and on that account more moveable, will, when the undulations are considerable, be alternately heaved up and let down again. Now, at each time that it is heaved up, however small the space may be, it must be somewhat accelerated in its descent, and will hardly settle on the same point where it rested before. Thus it will gain a little ground at each undulation, and will slowly make its way towards the depths of the ocean, or to the lowest situation it can reach. This, as far as we may presume to follow a progress which is not the subject of immediate observation, is one of the great means by which loose materials of every kind are transported to a great distance, and spread out in beds at the bottom of the ocean.

370. The lighter parts are more easily carried to great distances, being actually suspended in the water, by which they are very gradually and slowly deposited. A remarkable proof of this is furnished from an observation made by Lord Mulgrave, in his voyage to the North Pole. In the latitude of 65° nearly, and about 250 miles distant from the nearest land, which was the coast of Norway, he sounded with a line of 688 fathoms, or 4098 feet; and the lead, when it struck the ground, sunk in a soft blue clay to the depth of ten feet.[186] The tenuity and fineness of the mud, which allowed the lead to sink so deep into it, must have resulted from a deposition of the lighter kinds of earth, which being suspended in the water, had been carried to a great distance, and were now without doubt forming a regular stratum at the bottom of the sea.

[186] Phipps's Voyage, p. 74, 141.

371. The quantity of detritus brought down by the rivers, and distributed in this manner over the bottom of the sea, is so great, that several narrow seas have been thereby rendered sensibly shallower. The Baltic has been computed to decrease in depth at the rate of forty inches in a hundred years. The Yellow Sea, which is a large gulf contained between the coast of China and the peninsula of Corea, receives so much mud from the great rivers that run into it, that it takes its colour, as well as its name, from that circumstance; and the European mariners who have lately navigated it, observed, that the mud was drawn up by the ships, so as to be visible in their wake to a considerable distance.[187] Computations have been made of the time that it will require to fill up this gulf, and to withdraw it entirely from the dominion of the ocean: but the data are not sufficiently exact to afford any precise result, and are no doubt particularly defective from this cause, that much of the earth carried into the gulf by the rivers, must be carried out of it by the currents and tides, and the finer parts wafted probably to great distances in the Pacific Ocean.[188] The mere attempt, however, towards such a computation, shows how evident the progress of filling up is to every attentive observer; and, though it may not ascertain the measure, it sufficiently declares the reality of the operations, by which the waste of the present continents is made subservient to the formation of new land.

[187] Staunton's Account of the Embassy to China, vol. i. p. 448.

[188] Perouse, in sailing along the coast of China, from Formosa to the strait between Corea and Japan, though generally fifty or sixty leagues from the land, had soundings at the depth of forty-five fathoms, and sometimes at that of twenty-two. Atlas du Voyage de la Perouse, No. 43.

372. Sandbanks, such as abound in the German Ocean, to whatever they owe their origin, are certainly modified, and their form determined, by the tides and currents. Without the operation of these last, banks of loose sand and mud could hardly preserve their form, and remain intersected by many narrow channels. The formation of the banks on the coast of Holland, and even of the Dogger Bank itself, has been ascribed to the meeting of tides, by which a state of tranquillity is produced in the waters, and of consequence a more copious deposition of their mud. Even the great bank of Newfoundland seems to be determined in its extent by the action of the Gulf stream. In the North Sea, the current which sets out of the Baltic, has evidently determined the shape of the sandbanks opposite to the coast of Norway, and produced a circular sweep in them, of which it is impossible to mistake the cause.

In proof of the action here ascribed to the waters of the sea, in transporting materials to an unlimited extent, we may add the well known observation, that the stones brought up by the lead from the bottom of the sea, are generally round and polished, hardly ever sharp and angular. This could never happen to stones that were not subject to perpetual attrition.

373. Currents are no doubt the great agents in diffusing the detritus of the land over the bottom of the sea. These have been long known to exist; but it is only since the later improvements in navigation, that they have been understood to constitute a system of great permanence, regularity, and extent, connected with the trade winds, and other circumstances in the natural history of the globe. The Gulf stream was many years since observed to transport the water, and the temperature of the tropical regions into the climates of the north; and we are indebted to the researches of Major Rennell, for the knowledge of a great system of currents, of which it is only a part. That geographer, who is so eminent for enriching the details of his science with the most interesting facts in history or in physics, has shown, that along the eastern coast of Africa, from about the mouth of the Red Sea, a current fifty leagues in breadth sets continually towards the south-west.[189] It doubles the Cape of Good Hope, runs from thence north-west, preserving on the whole the direction of the coast, but reaching so far into the ocean, that, about the parallel of St Helena, its breadth exceeds 1000 miles. From thence, as it approaches the line, its direction is more nearly east; and meeting in the parallel of 3° north, with a current which has come along the western coast of Africa from the north, the two united stretch across the Atlantic, in a line somewhat south of west, and in a very wide and rapid stream. This stream meets the American land at Cape St Roque, where it is joined by another coming up along the eastern shore of that continent, and directed towards the north. They proceed northward together till they enter the Gulf of Florida, from which being as it were reflected, they form the Gulf stream, passing along the coast of North America, and stretching across the Atlantic to the British Isles. From thence the current turns to the south, and, proceeding down the coast of Spain and Africa, meets the stream ascending from the south, as already described, and thus continues in perpetual circulation. The velocity of these currents is not less remarkable than their extent. At the Cape of Good Hope, the rate is thirty nautical miles in twenty four hours; in some places forty five; and under the line seventy seven. When the Gulf stream issues from the Straits of Bahama, it runs at the rate of four miles an hour, and proceeds to the distance of 1800 miles, before its velocity is reduced to half that quantity. In the parallel of 38°, near 1000 miles from the above strait, the water of the stream has been found ten degrees warmer than the air.

[189] Geography of Herodotus, p. 672.

374. The course of the Gulf stream is so fixed and regular, that nuts and plants from the West Indies are annually thrown ashore on the Western Islands of Scotland. The mast of a man of war, burnt at Jamaica, was driven several months afterwards on the Hebrides,[190] after performing a voyage of more than 4000 miles, under the direction of a current, which, in the midst of the ocean, maintains its course as steadily as a river does upon the land.

[190] Pennant's Arctic Zoology, Introd. p. 70.

The great system of currents thus traced through the Atlantic, has no doubt phenomena corresponding to it in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, which the industry of future navigators may discover. The whole appears to be connected with the trade winds, the figure of our continents, the temperature of the seas themselves, and perhaps with some inequalities in the structure of the globe. The disturbance produced by these causes in the equilibrium of the sea, probably reaches to the very bottom of it, and gives rise to those counter currents, which have sometimes been discovered at great depths under the surface.[191]

[191] Histoire Naturelle de Buffon, Supplément, tom. ix. p. 479. 8vo.

The great transportation of materials that must result from the action of these combined currents is obvious, and serves not a little to diminish our wonder, at finding the productions of one climate so frequently included among the fossils of another. Amid all the revolutions of the globe, the economy of nature has been uniform, in this respect, as well as in so many others, and her laws are the only thing that have resisted the general movement. The rivers and the rocks, the seas and the continents, have been changed in all their parts; but the laws which direct those changes, and the rules to which they are subject, have remained invariably the same.

375. Objections have been made to that translation of materials by the waters of the ocean which is supposed in this theory, particularly by Mr Kirwan, in his Geological Essays; and, though I might perhaps content myself with the remark already made, that the Neptunian system involves suppositions concerning the transportation of solid bodies by the sea, in the early ages of the world, as wonderful as those which, according to our theory, are common to all ages, I am unwilling to remain satisfied with a mere argumentum ad hominem, where the fallacy of the reasoning is so easily detected.

376. One of Mr Kirwan's objections to the deposition of materials at the bottom of the sea, is thus stated: "Frisi has remarked, in his mathematical discourses, that if any considerable mass of matter were accumulated in the interior of the ocean, the diurnal motion of the globe would be disturbed, and consequently it would be perceptible; a phenomenon, however, of which no history or tradition gives any account."[192]

[192] Geol. Essays, p. 441.

The appeal made here to Frisi is singularly unfortunate, as that philosopher has demonstrated the very contrary of Mr Kirwan's position, and has proved, that the disturbance given to the diurnal motion by the causes here referred to may be real, but cannot be perceptible. Having investigated a formula expressing the law which all such disturbances must necessarily observe, he concludes, "Hàc autem formulâ manifestum fiet, ex iis omnibus variationibus quæ in terrestri superficie observari solent, montium et collium abrasione, dilapsu corporum ponderosiorum in inferiores telluris sinus, nullam oriri posse variationem sensibilem diurni motûs. Nam si statuamus data aliqua annorum periodo terrestrem superficiem ad duos usque pedes abradi undique, eam vero materiæ quantitatem ad profunditatem pedum 1000 dilabi; erit omne quod inde orietur incrementum velocitatis diurni motûs 30000/(19638051)2 = 1/12855068184."[193]

[193] Frisii Opera, tom. iii. p. 269.

Here, it is evident, that Frisi admits those very changes on the surface which we are contending for, and shows, that their tendency is to accelerate the earth's diurnal motion, but, by a quantity so small, that, in a space of time amounting at least to 200 years, the increase of the diurnal motion would only be such a part of the whole as the preceding fraction is of unity.[194]

[194] The time requisite for taking away by waste and erosion two feet from the surface of all our continents, and depositing it at the bottom of the sea, cannot be reckoned less than 200 years. The fraction 1/12855068184, reduced to parts of a day, is 1/148554 of a second; so that it would require 200 years to shorten the length of the day, by the above fraction of a second; and therefore it would require 148554 times 200 years, or 29710800 years, to diminish it an entire second. The accumulated effect, however, of all the diminutions during that period, would amount to much more: and if we had any perfectly uniform standard to compare the motion of the earth with, its difference from that standard would increase as the squares of the time, and the total acceleration would amount to one second in 77080 years. Whatever relation this bears to the age of the globe itself, it exceeds more than ten times the age of any historical record.

Though Frisius concludes, as is stated here, that the acceleration produced in the diurnal motion of the earth, is far too inconsiderable to become the object of astronomical observation, he makes a supposition difficult to be reconciled with this conclusion, namely, that the acceleration has had a sensible effect on the figure of the earth, or rather of the sea, having increased the centrifugal force, and thereby accumulated the waters under the equator, in the present, more than in former ages. Such an accumulation, he thinks agreeable to certain appearances that have been observed respecting the ancient level of the sea. These appearances will be afterwards considered: it is sufficient to remark here, that though the fraction, expressing the increment of the centrifugal force, must be double that which expresses the acceleration, it must be too small to have any perceptible effect in elevating the sea, except after an immense interval of time; and the compensations which arise from other causes, probably must prevent it from becoming sensible in any length of time whatsoever.

377. The instance just given may serve as one of many, to shew what confidence is to be placed in that indigested mass of facts and quotations which Mr Kirwan, without discrimination, and without discussion, has brought together from all quarters. He has no intention, I believe, to deceive his readers; but we may judge, from this specimen, of the precautions he has taken against being deceived himself.

In some respects, the result of Frisi's investigation must be considered as imperfect. If there were no relative motion in the parts of our globe, but that by which things descend from a higher to a lower level, a continual acceleration of its rotation, though extremely slow, would take place, as above computed. But as, in the interior of the earth, there are undoubtedly motions of a tendency opposite to those on the surface, and directed from the centre towards the circumference, they must produce a retardation in the diurnal revolution; and from this must arise an inequality, not uniformly progressive in the same direction, but periodical, and confined within certain limits, as the causes are by which it is produced.[195]

[195] Even in the descent of bodies from a higher to a lower level at the surface of the earth, the whole tendency is not to increase the velocity of the earth's rotation, and many compensations take place, which, when the matter is considered only in general, are necessarily overlooked. This will appear evident, if we reflect, that it is not simply the approach of a body towards the centre of the earth, or its removal from that centre, which tends to disturb the rotation of the earth; but its approach to the axis of the earth, or its removal from that axis. The velocity with which a particle of matter revolves, whether on the surface, or in the interior of the globe, is proportional to its distance from the axis of rotation; and therefore, when a body comes nearer to the axis, it loses a part of the motion which it had before; which part, of consequence, is communicated to the whole mass of the earth, and therefore tends to increase the velocity with which it revolves. The contrary happens when a body recedes from the axis; for it then receives an addition to its velocity, which, of course, is taken away from the rotatory motion of the earth.

Hence, bodies moving in a horizontal plane, may increase or diminish the swiftness of the diurnal motion, according as they move towards the poles or towards the equator; and those which descend from a higher to a lower level, disturb the earth's rotation, much more in consequence of their horizontal, than of their perpendicular motion. The Ganges, for instance, though its source is probably elevated no less than 7000 feet above the level of the sea, tends to retard the earth's rotation, by bringing its waters, and the mud contained in them, from the parallel of 31° to that of 22°, and so increasing their distance from the earth's axis by more than 1/12 th part. Had the Ganges flowed towards the north, as the Nile does, its effect would have been just the contrary.

In the same manner, a stone descending from the top of a mountain, may accelerate or retard the earth's rotation, according to the direction in which it descends. If it descend on the side of the elevated pole, it will then produce acceleration, because its distance from the axis will be diminished; but if it descend on the side of the depressed pole, and if the direction in which it is moved, be over a line less inclined, than a line drawn from the same point to the depressed pole, it will then produce a retardation, because its distance from the axis will be increased.

Let us suppose, for example, that the top of Mount Blanc is in latitude 45° 49′, and that its height is 2450 toises above the level of the sea. The point at which a line drawn from the top of this mountain, parallel to the earth's axis, will meet the superficies of the sea, (supposing that superficies continued inland from the Mediterranean), must be about 2382 toises in horizontal distance, or about 2½ minutes south of the summit, that is, in the parallel of 45° 46½′; and if this parallel be continued all round the globe, the points of the earth's surface between it and the equator, are all more distant from the earth's axis than the top of Mount Blanc is; whereas all the points to the north of it are nearer to that axis. A stone, therefore, from the top of Mount Blanc, if carried any where to the south of the above parallel, will retard the earth's diurnal motion; but if carried any where to the north of the same line, will accelerate that motion.

The same quantity of matter, however, carried an equal distance toward the pole, and toward the equator, from any point, will lose more velocity in the former case than it will gain in the latter, as easily follows from the nature of circle. Therefore, supposing an equal dispersion of the detritus of a mountain in all directions, the parts that go toward the pole will most disturb the diurnal motion; and hence a balance on their side, or in favour of acceleration, as already observed.

378. Mr Kirwan's second objection is founded on the misapprehension of a well-known fact in the natural history of the earth. "Rivers," says this author, "do not carry into the sea the spoils which they bring from the land, but employ them in the formation of deltas of low alluvial land at their mouths, according to what Major Rennell has proved." The fact of the formation of deltas from the spoils which the rivers carry from the higher grounds, is perfectly ascertained; and the detail into which Major Rennell has entered in the passage referred to by Mr Kirwan, does credit to the acuteness and accuracy of that excellent geographer. But it is not there asserted, that rivers employ all the materials which they carry with them, in the formation of those deltas, and deliver none of them into the sea. On the contrary, they carry from the delta itself mud and earth, which they can deposit no where but in the sea; and it is this circumstance chiefly that limits the increase of those alluvial lands, and makes them either cease to increase, or makes them increase very slowly after a certain period, though the supply of earth from the higher grounds remains nearly the same. To make Mr Kirwan's argument conclusive, it would be necessary to prove, that all the mud carried down by the Nile or the Ganges, was deposited on the low lands before these rivers enter the sea; a thing so obviously absurd, that nothing but his haste to obtain a conclusion unfavourable to the Plutonic system, could have prevented him from perceiving it[196].

[196] The instance mentioned in the Geological Essays, from the travels of the Abbé Fortis, concerning urns thrown into the Adriatic, upwards of 1400 years ago, and not yet covered with mud, must be explained from peculiar circumstances, or local causes, with which we are unacquainted, as it makes against the deposition of earth near the shore, and in narrow seas; a general fact which, I think, every body admits.

379. A remark which Major Rennell has made concerning the mouths of rivers, in his Geography of Herodotus, deserves Mr Kirwan's attention, though perhaps he may not be able to put on it an interpretation quite so favourable to his system. The remark is, that the mouths of great rivers are often formed on principles quite opposite to one another, so that some of them have a real delta or triangle of flat land at their mouths, while others have an estuary, or what may not improperly be called a negative delta. Of the latter kind are some of the greatest rivers in the world, the Plata, the Oroonoko and the Maranon, and by far the greatest number of our European rivers. Nobody can doubt, that the three rivers just named carry with them as much earth as the Nile, or the Euphrates, or any other river in the world. All this they have deposited in the sea, and committed to the currents, which sweep along the shore of the American continent, and by these they have been spread out over the unlimited tracts of the ocean.

Indeed, nothing can be more just than Dr Hutton's observation, that where low land is formed at the mouths of rivers, there the rivers bring down more than the sea is able to carry away; but that where such land is not formed, it is because the sea is able to carry off immediately all the deposit which it receives.

380. Mr Kirwan has denied on another principle the power of the sea to carry to a distance the materials delivered into it: "Notwithstanding," says he, "many particles of earth are by rivers conduced to the sea, yet none are conveyed in any distance, but are either deposited at their mouths, or rejected by currents or by tides; and the reason is, because the tide of flood is always more impetuous and forcible than the tide of ebb, the advancing waves being pressed forward by the countless number behind them, whereas the retreating are pressed backward by a far smaller number, as must be evident to an attentive spectator; and hence it is that all floating things cast into the sea, are at last thrown on shore, and not conveyed into the mid regions of the sea, as they should be if the reciprocal undulations of the tides were equally powerful "[197]

[197] Kirwan's Geol. Essays, p. 439.

381. But if the attentive spectator, instead of trusting to a vague impression, or listening to some crude theory of undulations, reflects on one of the most simple facts respecting the ebbing and flowing of the tides, he will be very little disposed to acquiesce in the above conclusion. He has only to consider, that the flowing of the tide requires just six hours, and the ebbing of it likewise six hours; so that the same body of water flows in upon the shore, and retreats from it, in the same time. The quantity of matter moved, therefore, and the velocity with which it is moved, are in both cases the same; and it remains for Mr Kirwan to show in what the difference of their force can possibly consist.

The force with which the waves usually break upon our shores, does not arise from the velocity of the tide being greater in one direction than in another. In the main ocean, the waves have no progressive motion, and the columns of water alternately rise and fall, without any other than a reciprocating motion: a kind of equilibrium takes place among the undulations, and each wave being equally acted upon by those on opposite sides, remains fixed in its place. Near the shore this cannot happen; the water on the land side from its shallowness being incapable of rising to the height necessary to balance the great undulations which are without. The water runs, therefore, as it were, from a higher to a lower level, spreading itself towards the land side. This produces the breakers on our shores, and the surf of the tropical seas. A rock or a sandbank coming within a certain distance of the surface, is sufficient, in any part of the ocean, to obstruct the natural succession of undulations; and, by destroying the mutual reaction of the waves, to give them a progressive instead of a reciprocating motion.

382. It is, however, but from a small distance, that the waves are impelled against the shore with a progressive motion. The border of breakers that surrounds any coast is narrow, compared with the distance to which the detritus from the land is confessedly carried; the water, while it advances at the surface, flows back at the bottom; and these contrary motions are so nearly equal, that it is but a very momentary accumulation of the water that is ever produced on any shore.

If it were otherwise, and if it were true that the sea throws out every thing, and carries away nothing, we should have a constant accumulation of earth and sand along all shores whatsoever, at least wherever a stream ran into the sea. This, as is abundantly evident, is quite contrary to the fact.

So, also, the bars formed at the mouths of rivers, after having attained a certain magnitude, increase no farther, not because they cease to receive augmentations from the land, but because their diminution from the sea, increasing with their magnitude, becomes at length so great, as completely to balance those augmentations. When properly examined, therefore, the phenomena, which have been proposed as most inconsistent with the indefinite transportation of stony bodies, afford very satisfactory proofs of that operation.

383. It is true, that bodies which float in the water, when carried along on the tops of the waves towards a shelving beach, having acquired a certain velocity, are thrown farther in upon the land than the distance they would have floated to, if they had been simply sustained by the water. The depth of water, therefore, at the place where they take the ground, is not likely to be such as to float them again, and to carry them out towards the sea. They are, therefore, left behind; and this produces an appearance of a force impelling floating bodies towards the land, much greater and more general than really takes place.

These observations may serve to show, how unsound the principles are from which Mr Kirwan's conclusions are deduced: they are perhaps more than is necessary for that purpose: it might have been sufficient to observe, that the increase of land on the sea shore is limited, though the augmentation from the land is certainly indefinite, a proof that the diminution from the sea is constant and equal to the increase.

384. "Mariners," says Mr Kirwan, "were accustomed, for some centuries back, to discover their situation, by the kind of earth or sand brought up by their sounding plummets; a method which would prove fallacious, if the surface of the bottom did not continue invariably the same."[198]

[198] Geol. Essays, p. 440.

The fact here stated, that mariners, when navigation was more imperfect than it is now, had very frequent recourse to this method, and that they still use it occasionally, is very true. But from this, the only inference that can be fairly deduced is, that the changes at the bottom of the sea are very slow, and the variation but little; not merely from one year to another, but even from one century to another. The rules by which the mariner judged of his position from the quality of the earth which the lead brought up, and which were deduced no doubt from observations made at no very great distance of time, might be sufficient for his purpose, though a slow change had been all the while going forward. Such observations could at best have little accuracy, and could not be affected by small variations. It is the slowness of the change, that makes the experience of one age applicable, in this, as in innumerable other instances, to the observations of the next. If a long interval is taken, we will look in vain for the same uniformity of results. A pilot, who would at present judge of his position in the German Ocean, by comparing his soundings with those taken by Pytheas, (supposing them known) in his navigation of that sea, more than 2000 years ago, could hardly be expected to determine his latitude and longitude with great exactness; and I know not if the most zealous advocate for the immutability of the earth's surface, would be willing to trust his safety in a ship that was guided by such antiquated rules.