WCP2241

Letter (WCP2241.2131)

[1]

Edinburgh

21st March 1870

Dear Sir, —

An attack of an old complaint, pain in the head, has prevented me from being able to answer your letter1 till today.

On looking over my stock I find that all my separate copies of the paper on Geol[ogical]. Time2 are gone with the exception of one or two copies of the last part.

I read your able article [2] on Geol[ogical]. Time in "Nature" with great pleasure and interest[.]3

With the exception of a small point of little or no importance whatever, which you will find alluded to in the last page of a paper on Ocean Currents which was written some months ago,4 I agree with you out and out on all the points.

I feel satisfied that your estimate of the age of our stratified formations is much nearer the truth then the one I gave in my paper on Geol[ogical]. Time.

Thanks for the very complimentary way in which you speak [3] of my labours in your article.

I have just read a letter by Mr. Dawkins5 in Nature on your article.6 He seems to have got into the mud in regard to real pith of your argument.

I am, Dear Sir | Yours very truly | James Croll [signature]

Alfred R. Wallace, Esq

See ARW to James Croll, 14 March 1870 (WCP3353.3321).
Croll, J. 1868. On Geological Time, and the Probable Date of the Glacial and the Upper Miocene Period. Philosophical Magazine. 36(244), 362–386.
Wallace, A. R. 1870. The Measurement of Geological Time. I. Nature 1: 399-401 (17 Feb. 1870) / II. Nature 1: 452-455 (3 March 1870).
Croll, J. 1870. On ocean currents in relation to the distribution of heat over the globe. Philosophical Magazine. 39: 259, 81-106.
Dawkins, William Boyd (1837-1929). British geologist and archaeologist.
Dawkins, W. B. 1870. The Geological Calculus. Nature 1(20), 505-506.

Please cite as “WCP2241,” in Beccaloni, G. W. (ed.), Ɛpsilon: The Alfred Russel Wallace Collection accessed on 20 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/wallace/letters/WCP2241