Taking this for the extreme degree of insolubility of mineral substances, (though there are many of which the insolubility is absolute, or, to speak in the language of calculation, infinitely great,) we may suppose the insolubility of all the rest, or the quantities of water in which they are dissolved, to be ranged in a descending scale from 500 to 0, the extreme degree of deliquescence. Then, taking the arithmetical mean between these extremes, it will give us 250, as the proportion of water in which mineral substances may at an average be dissolved. But this average is much less than the truth; for the quantity of siliceous earth is great in comparison of any of the rest, and the mineral substances that are extremely soluble in water are but in a small quantity; therefore, when we suppose mineral bodies, at a medium, to be soluble in 250 times their own weight of water, we make a supposition extremely favourable to the Neptunian system.

432. This is the proportion between the weight of the solvent, and of the substances held in solution: to have the proportion of their bulks, we may suppose the specific gravity of mineral bodies in general to be to that of water as 5 to 2, and then we have the ratio of bulks, that of 250 × 5 to 2 × 1, or of 625 to 1. It follows, then, that minerals in general cannot be supposed soluble in less than 625 times their bulk of water.

433. Again, it must be allowed to the Neptunists, that the fluidity of the whole earth is not necessary to account for its assuming the spheroidal figure. It is sufficient if the whole of that crust or shell of matter was fluid, which is contained between the actual surface of the terrestrial spheroid, and the surface of the sphere inscribed within it; that is, of the sphere which has for its diameter the polar axis of the earth. The whole of the minerals which compose this shell, must at least have been dissolved in water, and have formed the chaotic mass of Mr Kirwan. The volume of the water required for this was not less than 625 times the bulk of the spheroidal shell that has just been mentioned.

But, assuming the difference between the polar axis and the equatorial diameter to be 1/300 of the latter, which is the supposition most agreeable to the phenomena, it is easy to show that the magnitude of the above spheroidal shell, or the difference between the solid content of the earth, and the sphere inscribed in it, is greater than 1/151 and less than 1/150 of the whole earth; so that the earth is less than 151 times the spheroidal shell.

The volume of the water, therefore, necessary to hold in solution the materials of this shell, is to the volume of the whole earth as 625 to 151, or in a greater ratio than that of four to one: and such, therefore, at the very least, is the quantity of water which Mr Kirwan supposes, after it ceased to act in its chemical capacity, to have retired into caverns in the interior of the earth. Thus the Neptunists, in their account of the spheroidal figure of the earth, are reduced to a cruel dilemma, and are forced to choose between a physical and a mathematical impossibility.

If we would inquire whether the opinion of the igneous origin of minerals, as commonly received by the Vulcanists, is capable of affording a better solution of this difficulty, the theory of M. de Buffon is the first that presents itself.

434. That philosopher considers the existence of the spheroidal figure as a proof that the whole of the earth must have been originally fluid; and as the fluidity of the whole can only be ascribed to fusion, he has supposed that the earth was originally a mass of melted matter struck off from the sun by the collision of a comet; and that this mass, when made to revolve on its axis, put on a spheroidal figure, which it has retained, though now cooled down to congelation.

This system need not be considered in detail; the foundation of it is laid in such defiance of the principles of geometry and mechanics, that the architect, notwithstanding all the fertility of his invention, and all the resources of his genius, was never able to give any solidity to the structure.

But it will be said, that we may take a part of the system, without venturing on the whole, and may suppose that the earth, or at least the external crust of it, has been fluid by fire, though we do not inquire into the cause of this fire, or into the manner in which it was produced.

It is indeed true, that, when this is done, we have not the same sort of absurdity to encounter that we met with in the Neptunian system, and that the Volcanic theory does not, like it, come into direct collision with an axiom of geometry. There are, nevertheless, great objections to it; for though all the phenomena of the mineral kingdom attest a fluidity of igneous origin, yet it is a fluidity that was never more than partial; and though it has been over all the earth, has been over it in succession only. Besides, we are not entitled to assume the existence, and again the disappearance of such a great quantity of heat, without assigning some cause for the change.