130. The system of Lazzaro Moro has been remarked as approaching nearer to this theory than any other; and it is certain, that one very important principle is common to them both. The theory of the Italian geologist was chiefly directed to the explanation of the remains of marine animals, which are found in mountains far from the sea; and it appears to have been suggested to him by the phenomena of the Campi Phlegræi, and by the production of the new island of Santorini in the Archipelago. He accordingly supposes, that the islands and continents have been all raised up, like the above-mentioned island, from the bottom of the sea, by the force of volcanic fire: that these fires began to burn under the bottom of the ocean, soon after the creation of the world, when as yet the ocean covered the whole earth: that they at first elevated a portion of the land; and in this primitive land no shells are found, as the original ocean was destitute of fish. The volcanoes continuing to burn, under the sea, after the creation of animated nature, the strata that were then raised up by their action were full of shells and other marine objects; and, from the violence with which they were elevated, arose the contortions and inclined position which they frequently possess.[39]

[39] Dé Crostacei, et degli altri Marini Corpi, che si trovano su' Monti: di Ant. Lazzaro Moro. Venezia. 1740.

This system is imperfect, as it makes no peculiar provision for the consolidation of the strata, which, according to it, as well as the Neptunian system, must be ascribed to the action, not of fire, but of water. No account is given of the mineralization of the shells found in the strata, or of the difference between them and the shells found loose at the bottom of the sea; and no distinction is made between stratified and unstratified substances. But, with all this, Lazzaro Moro has certainly the merit of having perceived, that some other power than that which deposited the strata, must have been employed for their elevation, and that they have endured the action of a disturbing force.

131. From this comparison it appears, that Dr Hutton's theory is sufficiently distinct, even from the theories which approach to it most nearly, to merit, in the strictest sense, the appellation of new and original. There are indeed few inventions or discoveries, recorded in the history of science, to which nearer approaches were not made before they were fully unfolded. It therefore very well deserves to be distinguished by a particular name; and, if it behoves us to follow the analogy observed in the names of the two great systems, which at present divide the opinions of geologists, we may join Mr Kirwan in calling this the Plutonic System. For my own part, I would rather have it characterized by a less splendid, but juster name, that of the Huttonian Theory.

132. The circumstance, however, which gives to this theory its peculiar character, and exalts it infinitely above all others, is the introduction of the principle of pressure, to modify the effects of heat when applied at the bottom of the sea. This is in fact the key to the grand enigma of the mineral kingdom, where, while one set of phenomena indicates the action of fire, another set, equally remarkable, seems to exclude the possibility of that action, by presenting us with mineral substances, in such a state as they could never have been brought into by the operation of the fires we see at the surface of the earth. These two classes of phenomena are reconciled together, by admitting the power of compression to confine the volatile parts of bodies when heat is applied to them, and to force them, in many instances, to undergo fusion, instead of being calcined or dissipated by burning or inflammation. In this hypothesis, which some affect to consider as a principle gratuitously assumed, there appears to me nothing but a very fair and legitimate generalization of the properties of heat. Combustion and inflammation are chemical processes, to which other conditions are required, besides the presence of a high temperature. The state of the mineral regions makes it reasonable to presume, that these conditions are wanting in the bowels of the earth, where, of consequence, we have a right to look for nothing but expansion and fusion, the only operations which seem essential to heat, and inseparable from the application of it, in certain degrees, to certain substances. Though this principle, therefore, had no countenance from analogy, the admirable simplicity, and the unity, which it introduces into the phenomena of geology, would sufficiently justify the application of it to the theory of the earth.

As another excellence of this theory, I may, perhaps, be allowed to remark, that it extends its consequences beyond those to which the author of it has himself adverted, and that it affords, which no geological theory has yet done, a satisfactory explanation of the spheroidal figure of the earth.[40]

[40] [Note xxv.]

133. Yet, with all these circumstances of originality, grandeur, and simplicity in its favour, with the addition of evidence as demonstrative as the nature of the subject will admit, this theory has probably many obstacles to overcome, before it meet the general approbation. The greatness of the objects which it sets before us, alarms the imagination; the powers which it supposes to be lodged in the subterraneous regions; a heat which has subdued the most refractory rocks, and has melted beds of marble and quartz; an expansive force, which has folded up, or broken the strata, and raised whole continents from the bottom of the sea; these are things with which, however certainly they may be proved, the mind cannot soon be familiarized. The change and movement also, which this theory ascribes to all that the senses declare to be most unalterable, raise up against it the same prejudices which formerly opposed the belief in the true system of the world; and it affords a curious proof, how little such prejudices are subject to vary, that as Aristarchus, an ancient follower of that system, was charged with impiety for moving the everlasting Vesta from her place, so Dr Hutton, nearly on the same ground, has been subjected to the very same accusation. Even the length of time which this theory regards as necessary to the revolutions of the globe, is looked on as belonging to the marvellous; and man, who finds himself constrained by the want of time, or of space, in almost all his undertakings, forgets, that in these, if in any thing, the riches of nature reject all limitation.[41]

[41] [Note xxvi.]

The evidence which must be opposed to all these causes of incredulity, cannot be fully understood without much study and attention. It requires not only a careful examination of particular instances, but comprehensive views of the whole phenomena of geology; the comparison of things very remote with one another; the interpretation of the obscure by the luminous, and of the doubtful by the decisive appearances. The geologist must not content himself with examining the insulated specimens of his cabinet, or with pursuing the nice subtleties of mineralogical arrangement; he must study the relations of fossils, as they actually exist; he must follow nature into her wildest and most inaccessible abodes; and must select, for the places of his observations, those points, from which the variety and gradation of her works can be most extensively and accurately explored. Without such an exact and comprehensive survey, his mind will hardly be prepared to relish the true theory of the earth. "Naturæ enim vis atque majestas omnibus momentis fide caret, si quis modo partes atque non totam complectatur animo".[42]