FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221  
222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   >>   >|  
amphlet (554/2. "On the Origin of Coal," "Mem. Lit. Phil. Soc." Manchester Volume VIII., page 148, 1848.), it will be worth your while to array your facts and ideas against an aquatic origin of the coal, though I do not know whether you object to freshwater. I am sure I have read somewhere of the cones of Lepidodendron being found round the stump of a tree, or am I confusing something else? How interesting all rooted--better, it seems from what you say, than upright--specimens become. I wish Ehrenberg would undertake a microscopical hunt for infusoria in the underclay and shales; it might reveal something. Would a comparison of the ashes of terrestrial peat and coal give any clue? (554/3. In an article by M. F. Rigaud on "La Formation de la Houille," published in the "Revue Scientifique," Volume II., page 385, 1894, the author lays stress on the absence of certain elements in the ash of coals, which ought to be present, on the assumption that the carbon has been derived from plant tissues. If coal consists of altered vegetable debris, we ought to find a certain amount of alkalies and phosphoric acid in its ash. Had such substances ever been present, it is difficult to understand how they could all have been removed by the solvent action of water. (Rigaud's views are given at greater length in an article on the "Structure and Formation of Coal," "Science Progress," Volume II., pages 355 and 431, 1895.)) Peat ashes are good manure, and coal ashes, except mechanically, I believe are of little use. Does this indicate that the soluble salts have been washed out? i.e., if they are NOT present. I go up to Geological Council to-day--so farewell. (554/4. In a letter to Sir Joseph Hooker, October 6th, 1847, Mr. Darwin, in referring to the origin of Coal, wrote: "...I sometimes think it could not have been formed at all. Old Sir Anthony Carlisle once said to me gravely that he supposed Megatherium and such cattle were just sent down from heaven to see whether the earth would support them, and I suppose the coal was rained down to puzzle mortals. You must work the coal well in India.") LETTER 555. TO J.D. HOOKER. Down, May 22nd, 1860. Lyell tells me that Binney has published in Proceedings of Manchester Society a paper trying to show that Coal plants must have grown in very marine marshes. (555/1. "On the Origin of Coal," by E.W. Binney, "Mem. Lit. Phil. Soc. Manchester," Volume VIII., 1848, page 148. Binney examines the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221  
222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Volume
 

present

 

Binney

 
Manchester
 
Rigaud
 
published
 

Formation

 

article

 

Origin

 

origin


Council
 
Joseph
 

Hooker

 

October

 

letter

 

farewell

 

manure

 

mechanically

 

Structure

 

length


Science
 

Progress

 

Darwin

 
washed
 

soluble

 
Geological
 
HOOKER
 

LETTER

 

Proceedings

 

Society


marshes

 

examines

 
marine
 
plants
 

gravely

 
Megatherium
 

supposed

 

Carlisle

 

Anthony

 

formed


cattle

 

greater

 
suppose
 

rained

 
puzzle
 
mortals
 

support

 

heaven

 
referring
 

consists