WCP2178

[1]¹

92 Onslow Gardens

London S.W.

4^th April 1880.

Dear Mr Wallace

You are very welcome to the use of the two blocks for the engravings you require.

I shall look out for your new work²with great interest.

The election is luckily[?] over but the counting will not take place till tomorrow so I am still in ignorance of the result.

Have you seen Carpenter's article³ in this month's Nineteenth Century? [2] He makes very unfair imputations about my uncle's⁴ views on the question of permanence of oceanic areas. The original dispute about our "living now in the Cretaceous epoch" turned entirely on Dr Carpenter's ignorance of the Connotation of the geological term, Cretaceous; which he assumed to be the ordinary mineralogical one — chalky. This fallacy was exposed & received its quietus. Now Carpenter assumes that Sir Charles gave a definite opinion about the permanence of oceanic areas, which he never did, to my knowledge. He would be the last person to do so, as all positive evidence on the subject is buried at the bottom of the sea & speculation thereon is so much lunar politics. Carpenter [3] ⁵ exposes his ignorance of geology by saying that we have no reason to believe that vertical movements have ever taken place comparable over extensive areas comparable to that of oceans & continents; in ignorance or forgetfulness of the thickness & extent of the Coal fields of America & Europe & the phenomena of faults.

Not only is Carpenter [illeg. word deleted] wrong but he tries to get credit by detracting from my uncle's authority.

I do not know those[?] or any of the men who are dealing with the Challenger work, but I should be very glad that this misrepresentation & false geological notions should not go forth. The readers of the 19^th Century are hardly able to [4] appreciate the niceties of the question & competent geologists will not be deceived. But the ignorant public will be impressed by the tone[?].

I am personally on very good terms with Carpenter so please burn this letter or at any rate consider it as private.

Very truly yours | Leonard Lyell [signature] ⁶

He supports his position by quoting Geikie, but both rest their argument on negative evidence.