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