Box 2, Folder 8: Typewritten Letters, 1829-1832

-130-

1829.

strata of granite rocks to break up into fragments of different size, and set out upon a journey of several hundred, or perhaps thousands of miles from the beds in which they had for ages so quietly reposed? What power would suspend them in this restiff body of water and deposit those of the largest size on the top of the hills and in greater numbers? You may not be aware of this fact but I have noticed it in several instances. There to lie bleaching in the sun, divested of their original beauty by having their surfaces rounded by attrition for the astonishment and admiration of philosophers and geologists.***

What do you think of the following hypothesis? Suppose, as in your hypothesis, the surface of the earth was diversified at the time of the diluvial deposition and that an "extensive attraction" should occur of powerful force, the waters of the ocean would rush over the surface of the earth with such force as to plow up and carry along with it the earth with which it came in contact. The force of the attraction being sufficient to raise whole strata of rocks from their resting places, breaking them up into fragments, impelling them forward with the greatest impetuosity, which coming in contact with larger bodies have their angles broken off and their surfaces rounded and smoothed.

Those of the largest size would be attracted the most powerfully, outrun their comrades and arrive at the top of the hills, when the attraction beginning to subside, the boulders would rest upon the hill, on the same side from which the attraction proceeded.*********

The clay, sand, gravel, and primitive boulders would be deposited wherever the attraction ceased to operate upon them.*****

May not some comet, at some time, have come within the earth's attraction and performed these astonishing changes?

-131-

1829.

That's all, what do you think of it?

Last evening I stopped at the house of Col. John Noble in Lancaster. When he heard my name "Lapham" he enquired if I was ever at Lockport? When I answered "yes", he said he had a plan of the Lockport locks drawn by me. He showed me the plan, it was yours with your name on it in type, and a plan of Dibble's crane, which I think I drew. Don't you remember, we got a cuttof of a run-a-way (slave) fom Turner, with a cane and a pack on his back, we disencumbered him of his pack, and set him to tripping the box and driving horse on the crane in excavating the rock for the canal through the mountain ridge? There he stands on the top of the pile of red paint with his club drawn in the attitude of striking a blow. It made me think of Cross-eyed Paddy's "Jamie are you goin to stroike where yer look?" "Yes." "Faith and I'll not hould the coo."

Good night. All's well.

Mr. Increase A. Lapham.

Darius Lapham.

Circleville, O. Dec. 17th, 1829.

Dear Brother,--

Your continuance of the regular reciprocal correspondence of the 9th inst. was received through the politeness of Mr. Young.

I confess there were some inaccuracies in my hypothesis. It would have been better to suppose that the agitation of the waters was the cause of the removal of the earth from the hills into the valleys.

That the waters were in a state of agitation, at the time or immediately after the deposition of the diluvial earth and primitive boulders, we have sufficient evidence. We can now, I think assert without hesitation that the boulders were deposited with the

-132-

1829.

diluvium and that where the boulders occur, where the earth is not found, it is only because the earth has been removed.

Any geologist who will examine the canal where it passes along the Scioto Bluffs, and is cut into the edge of the earth at all depths below the surface and see the hundreds of boulders, which are there dug out and piled up by the workmen and then travel along the public road, which runs parallel to the canal about a quarter or half a mile back, so as to keep entirely on the surface of the diluvium and see that no boulders of any considerable size are to be found there, will say without hesitation, that the original situation of the boulders was in the diluvium.

If he would go up a ravine and see them collected along the bed, he would say at once that the earth had been carried away by the water which was inadequate to the removal of the boulders.

Now if the same experienced geologist should go up to the summit of a sandstone hill, on which there is no diluvium, and see the boulders collected there, why should not his conclusions be the same as before?

As another proof of the connection of the primitive boulders with the diluvium, might be mentioned their occurrence in the "Deep Cut" on the Welland canal.

I think you ascend rather too high in the scale of speculative geology, when you attempt to account for the origin of the deluge by the theory of exterior attraction.

Our object should only be to observe the facts which prove that a deluge once stood over this part of the country and that the primitive boulders are the result of its action, leaving to more distinguished geologists the business of accounting for its origin. The deluge was universal, the facts and phenomena which

-133-

1829.

we have to observe are local.***

Considerable damage has been done on the bluff sections of our line by the two late floods in the Scioto.***

Yours affectionately,

Increase.

Darius Lapham.

Dec. 23. *** Went home to eat a Christmas dinner, staid until Sunday the 27th, then went to Circleville.

New Haven, Dec. 24th, 1829.

Dear Sir,--

Yours of Dec. 1st. was received.*** I shall be very much pleased to receive the proposed communication of yourself and brother.*** I am glad you are going to examine the subject of boulders.

I would call your attention to the following things,-

1st. Their size, number and variety in given places.

2nd. Any appearance of being deposited by the effect of running waters and what direction or directions.

3rd. Any scratches or furrows &c. in the rocks in place over which they may be supposed to have passed, the number, directions, and depths of the furrows, &c.

4th. Whether more abundant on the borders of lakes and rivers and in the valley than else where.

The water limestone (from Louisville) I will endeavor to have examined if possible.

Yours truly,

B. Silliman.

I.A. Lapham.

1829. (Additions) 1.

[Jany? 1st?]- Went [onto?] the river with M Henry to level and [bake?] to the rock to ascertain its depth. A ball at our tavern tonight.- D'Etistes's.

Shippingsport Jany 12th, 1829.

Dear Brother

Yours of the 20th received. [Was?] microscope, which without doubt you have often seen mentioned in the newspapers, was exhibited in Louisville and went to see it as a Christmas amusement.

Suppose yourself in a dark room on a sunny day and that A.B. is in the wall and [C?] a powerful burning glass whose focus is on the object at D. [T.G.?] is a long narrow piece of glass passing through the tube on which the object is placed. At the end of the tube E is a magnifying glass in a common double convex lens though almost globular-it is the screen consistency of a white cloth on which the magnified object is thrown. The magnifying power is more or less in proportion to the greater or less distance of the screen from the instrument. The object can not be magnified and thrown on the screen unless it is brilliantly illuminated by the concentrated rays of the sun and to effect this is the use of the glass C. hence its name.

*There was a sketch that that it seems to be missing.

A louse which is about 1/16 of an inch in length was magnified to about seven feet, from this I calculated that the magnifying power was little more than one thousand times, although the owner contended it was a million times, perhaps it would magnify that number of times if he had zoom to place the screen for enough from the instrument, but that it did not when I saw it is very certain, the distance then from the instrument was about twelve feet and the screen was 6 x 8., the objects