The World Before the Deluge

by Louis Figuier

Fig. 69.—Treuil coal-mine, at St. Etienne.

In England it is the same; entire trees are found lying across the coal-beds. Sir Charles Lyell tells us[45] that in Parkfield Colliery, South Staffordshire, there was discovered in 1854, upon a surface of about a quarter of an acre, a bed of coal which has furnished as many as seventy-three stumps of trees with their roots attached, some of the former measuring more than eight feet in circumference; their roots formed part of a seam of coal ten inches thick, resting on a layer of clay two inches thick, under which was a second forest resting on a band of coal from two to five feet thick. Underneath this, again, was a third forest, with large stumps of Lepidodendra, Calamites, and other trees.[46]

In the lofty cliffs of the South Joggins, in the Bay of Fundy, in Nova Scotia, Sir Charles Lyell found in one portion of the coal-field 1,500 feet thick, as many as sixty-eight different surfaces, presenting evident traces of as many old soils of forests, where the trunks of the trees were still furnished with roots.[47]

We will endeavour to establish here the true geological origin of coal, in order that no doubt may exist in the minds of our readers on a subject of such importance. In order to explain the presence of coal in the depths of the earth, there are only two possible hypotheses. This vegetable débris may either result from the burying of plants brought from afar and transported by river or maritime currents, forming immense rafts, which may have grounded in different places and been covered subsequently by sedimentary deposits; or the trees may have grown on the spot where they perished, and where they are now found. Let us examine each of these theories.

Can the coal-beds result from the transport by water, and burial underground, of immense rafts formed of the trunks of trees? The hypothesis has against it the enormous height which must be conceded to the raft, in order to form coal-seams as thick as some of those which are worked in our collieries. If we take into consideration the specific gravity of wood, and the amount of carbon it contains, we find that the coal-deposits can only be about seven-hundredths of the volume of the original wood and other vegetable materials from which they are formed. If we take into account, besides, the numerous voids necessarily arising from the loose packing of the materials forming the supposed raft, as compared with the compactness of coal, this may fairly be reduced to five-hundredths. A bed of coal, for instance, sixteen feet thick, would have required a raft 310 feet high for its formation. These accumulations of wood could never have arranged themselves with sufficient regularity to form those well-stratified coal-beds, maintaining a uniform thickness over many miles, and that are seen in most coal-fields to lie one above another in succession, separated by beds of sandstone or shale. And even admitting the possibility of a slow and gradual accumulation of vegetable débris, like that which reaches the mouth of a river, would not the plants in that case be buried in great quantities of mud and earth? Now, in most of our coal-beds the proportion of earthy matter does not exceed fifteen per cent. of the entire mass. If we bear in mind, finally, the remarkable parallelism existing in the stratification of the coal-formation, and the state of preservation in which the impressions of the most delicate vegetable forms are discovered, it will, we think, be proved to demonstration, that those coal-seams have been formed in perfect tranquillity. We are, then, forced to the conclusion that coal results from the mineralisation of plants which has taken place on the spot; that is to say, in the very place where the plants lived and died.

It was suggested long ago by Bakewell, from the occurrence of the same peculiar kind of fireclay under each bed of coal, that it was the soil proper for the production of those plants from which coal has been formed.[48]

It has, also, been pointed out by Sir William Logan, as the result of his observations in the South Wales coal-field, and afterwards by Sir Henry De la Beche, and subsequently confirmed by the observations of Sir Charles Lyell in America, that not only in this country, but in the coal-fields of Nova Scotia, the United States, &c., every layer of true coal is co-extensive with and invariably underlaid by a marked stratum of arenaceous clay of greater or less thickness, which, from its position relatively to the coal has been long known to coal-miners, among other terms, by the name of under-clay.

The clay-beds, “which vary in thickness from a few inches to more than ten feet, are penetrated in all directions by a confused and tangled collection of the roots and leaves, as they may be, of the Stigmaria ficoides, these being frequently traceable to the main stem (Sigillaria), which varies in diameter from about two inches to half a foot. The main stems are noticed as occurring nearer the top than the bottom of the bed, as usually of considerable length, the leaves or roots radiating from them in a tortuous irregular course to considerable distances, and as so mingled with the under-clay that it is not possible to cut out a cubic foot of it which does not contain portions of the plant.” (Logan “On the Characters of the Beds of Clay immediately below the Coal-seams of South Wales,” Geol. Transactions, Second Series, vol. vi., pp. 491-2. An account of these beds had previously been published by Mr. Logan in the Annual Report of the Royal Institution of South Wales for 1839.)