Geological Observations on South America. Darwin Charles

siliceous porphyry; I procured others from a great depth off Staten Island, and others were brought me from the western extremity of the Falkland Islands. (At my request, Mr. Kent collected for me a bag of pebbles from the beach of White Rock harbour, in the northern part of the sound, between the two Falkland Islands. Out of these well-rounded pebbles, varying in size from a walnut to a hen's egg, with some larger, thirty-eight evidently belonged to the rocks of these islands; twenty-six were similar to the pebbles of porphyry found on the Patagonian plains, which rocks do not exist in situ in the Falklands; one pebble belonged to the peculiar yellow siliceous porphyry; thirty were of doubtful origin.) The distribution of the pebbles of this peculiar porphyry, which I venture to affirm is not found in situ either in Fuegia, the Falkland Islands, or on the coast of Patagonia, is very remarkable, for they are found over a space of 840 miles in a north and south line, and at the Falklands, 300 miles eastward of the coast of Patagonia. Their occurrence in Fuegia and the Falklands may, however, perhaps be due to the same ice-agency by which the boulders have been there transported.

      We have seen that porphyritic pebbles of a small size are first met with on the northern side of the Rio Colorado, the bed becoming well developed near the Rio Negro: from this latter point I have every reason to believe that the gravel extends uninterruptedly over the plains and valleys of Patagonia for at least 630 nautical miles southward to the Rio Gallegos. From the slope of the plains, from the nature of the pebbles, from their extension at the Rio Negro far into the interior, and at the Santa Cruz close up to the Cordillera, I think it highly probable that the whole breadth of Patagonia is thus covered. If so, the average width of the bed must be about two hundred miles. Near the coast the gravel is generally from ten to thirty feet in thickness; and as in the valley of Santa Cruz it attains, at some distance from the Cordillera, a thickness of 214 feet, we may, I think, safely assume its average thickness over the whole area of 630 by 200 miles, at fifty feet!

      The transportal and origin of this vast bed of pebbles is an interesting problem. From the manner in which they cap the step-formed plains, worn by the sea within the period of existing shells, their deposition, at least on the plains up to a height of 400 feet, must have been a recent geological event. From the form of the continent, we may feel sure that they have come from the westward, probably, in chief part from the Cordillera, but, perhaps, partly from unknown rocky ridges in the central districts of Patagonia. That the pebbles have not been transported by rivers, from the interior towards the coast, we may conclude from the fewness and smallness of the streams of Patagonia: moreover, in the case of the one great and rapid river of Santa Cruz, we have good evidence that its transporting power is very trifling. This river is from two to three hundred yards in width, about seventeen feet deep in its middle, and runs with a singular degree of uniformity five knots an hour, with no lakes and scarcely any still reaches: nevertheless, to give one instance of its small transporting power, upon careful examination, pebbles of compact basalt could not be found in the bed of the river at a greater distance than ten miles below the point where the stream rushes over the debris of the great basaltic cliffs forming its shore: fragments of the CELLULAR varieties have been washed down twice or thrice as far. That the pebbles in Central and Northern Patagonia have not been transported by ice-agency, as seems to have been the case to a considerable extent farther south, and likewise in the northern hemisphere, we may conclude, from the absence of all angular fragments in the gravel, and from the complete contrast in many other respects between the shingle and neighbouring boulder formation.

      Looking to the gravel on any one of the step-formed plains, I cannot doubt, from the several reasons assigned in this chapter, that it has been spread out and leveled by the long-continued action of the sea, probably during the slow rise of the land. The smooth and perfectly rounded condition of the innumerable pebbles alone would prove long-continued action. But how the whole mass of shingle on the coast-plains has been transported from the mountains of the interior, is another and more difficult question. The following considerations, however, show that the sea by its ordinary action has considerable power in distributing pebbles. Table 3 above shows how very uniformly and gradually the pebbles decrease in size with the gradually seaward increasing depth and distance. (I may mention, that at the distance of 150 miles from the Patagonian shore I carefully examined the minute rounded particles in the sand, and found them to be fusible like the porphyries of the great shingle bed. I could even distinguish particles of the gallstone-yellow porphyry. It was interesting to notice how gradually the particles of white quartz increased, as we approached the Falkland Islands, which are thus constituted. In the whole line of soundings between these islands and the coast of Patagonia dead or living organic remains were most rare. On the relations between the depth of water and the nature of the bottom, see Martin White on "Soundings in the Channel" pages 4, 6, 175; also Captain Beechey's "Voyage to the Pacific" chapter 18.) A series of this kind irresistibly leads to the conclusion, that the sea has the power of sifting and distributing the loose matter on its bottom. According to Martin White, the bed of the British Channel is disturbed during gales at depths of sixty-three and sixty-seven fathoms, and at thirty fathoms, shingle and fragments of shells are often deposited, afterwards to be carried away again. ("Soundings in the Channel" pages 4, 166. M. Siau states ("Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal" volume 31 page 246), that he found the sediment, at a depth of 188 metres, arranged in ripples of different degrees of fineness. There are some excellent discussions on this and allied subjects in Sir H. De la Beche's "Theoretical Researches.") Groundswells, which are believed to be caused by distant gales, seem especially to affect the bottom: at such times, according to Sir R. Schomburgk, the sea to a great distance round the West Indian Islands, at depths from five to fifteen fathoms, becomes discoloured, and even the anchors of vessels have been moved. ("Journal of Royal Geographical Society" volume 5 page 25. It appears from Mr. Scott Russell's investigations (see Mr. Murchison's "Anniversary Address Geological Society" 1843 page 40), that in waves of translation the motion of the particles of water is nearly as great at the bottom as at the top.) There are, however, some difficulties in understanding how the sea can transport pebbles lying at the bottom, for, from experiments instituted on the power of running water, it would appear that the currents of the sea have not sufficient velocity to move stones of even moderate size: moreover, I have repeatedly found in the most exposed situations that the pebbles which lie at the bottom are encrusted with full-grown living corallines, furnished with the most delicate, yet unbroken spines: for instance, in ten fathoms water off the mouth of the Santa Cruz, many pebbles, under half an inch in diameter, were thus coated with Flustracean zoophytes. (A pebble, one and a half inch square and half an inch thick, was given me, dredged up from twenty-seven fathoms depth off the western end of the Falkland Islands, where the sea is remarkably stormy, and subject to violent tides. This pebble was encrusted on all sides by a delicate living coralline. I have seen many pebbles from depths between forty and seventy fathoms thus encrusted; one from the latter depth off Cape Horn.) Hence we must conclude that these pebbles are not often violently disturbed: it should, however, be borne in mind that the growth of corallines is rapid. The view, propounded by Professor Playfair, will, I believe, explain this apparent difficulty, – namely, that from the undulations of the sea TENDING to lift up and down pebbles or other loose bodies at the bottom, such are liable, when thus quite or partially raised, to be moved even by a very small force, a little onwards. We can thus understand how oceanic or tidal currents of no great strength, or that recoil movement of the bottom-water near the land, called by sailors the "undertow" (which I presume must extend out seaward as far as the BREAKING waves impel the surface-water towards the beach), may gain the power during storms of sifting and distributing pebbles even of considerable size, and yet without so violently disturbing them as to injure the encrusting corallines. (I may take this opportunity of remarking on a singular, but very common character in the form of the bottom, in the creeks which deeply penetrate the western shores of Tierra del Fuego; namely, that they are almost invariably much shallower close to the open sea at their mouths than inland. Thus, Cook, in entering Christmas Sound, first had soundings in thirty-seven fathoms, then in fifty, then in sixty, and a little farther in no bottom with 170 fathoms. The sealers are so familiar with this fact, that they always look out for anchorage near the entrances of the creeks. See, also, on this subject, the "Voyages of the 'Adventure' and 'Beagle'" volume 1 page 375 and "Appendix" page 313. This Shoalness of the sea- channels near their entrances probably results from the quantity of sediment formed by the wear and tear of the outer rocks exposed to the full force of the open sea. I have no doubt that many lakes, for instance in Scotland,