WCP6182

The Rev[erend] F[rancis] Sterry’s,

Poltimore,

Exeter

9^th Sep[tember]. 1892

My dear Sir,

I have read Jukes-Browne’s¹ (what he calls) reply to you in Natural science² [sic]. I think he admits all that I for my part when would ask in favour of the doctrine of the permanence of ocean basins. He has appreciated the remark I made to him in a letter that his idea that the oceans were shallower in early times requires [2] that there must have been less water on the globe and he has accordingly availed himself of the suggestion in my book that a large part of the water may have come through volcanic eruptions. I however never contemplated so [1 word illeg. struck through] much being so supplied as he now assumes. But I would not deny its being possible. If it has been so it offers another argument in favour of the extreme antiquity of the world.

If you have read Lapworth’s³ Br[itish]. Assoc[iatio]n address⁴ about [1 word illeg. struck through] Suess’s⁵ Antlitz der Erde⁶ [sic] I should like to know [3] what you think about it. It seems to me to be a great fuss about a very little. I cannot read German I am sorry to say but if Lapworth’s account of the matter is at all a full one it leaves much to be desired. That the earth[’]s surface is covered with humps and holla hollows is clear enough. But is it proved that these are due to wave-like folds. And if they are — on what does the folded crust rest? and how is it supported in that position? And how is the defect of gravity on lofty mountains to be accounted for? I should have [4] looked for a little more argument and a little less pseudo-rhetoric from a man of Lapworth’s ability[.] I have read another review of Suess in french [sic] by Margerie⁷ but it does not seem to me much more satisfactory than Lapworth’s.

I was exceedingly pleased to make your acquaintance the other day & enjoyed our talk immensely.

I remain | Yours sincerely | Osmond Fisher⁸ [signature]

D[octo]r A. R. Wallace