THE GROWTH OF COAL.

[108]Report on 49th Parallel, 1875.

Other plants equally illustrate the decadence of important types of vegetable life. In the beautiful family of the Magnolias there exists in America a most remarkable and elegant tree, whose trunk attains sometimes a diameter of 7 feet and a height of 80 or 90 feet. Its broad deep green leaves are singularly truncate at the end, as if artificially cut off, and in spring it puts forth a wealth of large and brilliant orange and yellow flowers, from which it obtains the name of Tulip tree. It is theLiriodendron tulipiferaof botanists, and the sole species of its genus. This Tulip tree has a history. All through the Tertiary beds we find leaves referable to the genus, and belonging not to one species only, but to several, and as we go back into the Cretaceous, the species seem to become more numerous. Many of them have smaller leaves than the modern species, others larger, and some have forms even more quaint than that of the existing Tulip tree. The oldest that I have seen in Canada is one from the Upper Cretaceous ofPort McNeil in the north of Vancouver Island, which is as large as that of the modern species, and very similar in form. Thus this beautiful vegetable type culminated long geological ages ago, and was represented by many species, no doubt occupying a prominent place in the forests of the northern hemisphere. To-day only a single species exists, in our warmer regions, to keep up the memory of this almost perished genus; but that species is one of our most beautiful trees.

The history of the Sequoias or giant Cypresses, of which two species now exist in limited areas in California, is still more striking. These giant trees, monsters of the vegetable kingdom, are, strange to say, very limited in their geographical range. The greater of the two,Sequoia gigantea, the giant treepar excellence, seems limited to a few groves in California. At first sight this strikes us as anomalous, especially as we find that the tree will grow somewhat widely both in Europe and America when its seeds are sown in suitable soil. The mystery is solved when we learn that the two existing species are but survivors of a genus once diffused over the whole northern hemisphere, and represented by many species, constituting, in the Later Cretaceous and Eocene ages, vast and dark forests extending over enormous areas of our continents, and forming much of the material of the thick and widely distributed Lignite beds of North-western America. Thus the genus has had its time of expansion and prevalence, and is now probably verging on extinction, not because there are not suitable habitats, but either because it is now old and moribund, or because other and newer forms have now a preference in the existing conditions of existence.

The Plane trees, the Sassafras, the curious Ginkgo tree or fern-leaved yew of Japan, are cases of similar decadence of genera once represented by many species, while other trees, like the Willows and Poplars, the Maples, the Birches, the Oaks and the Pines, though of old date, are still as abundant asthey ever were, and some genera would seem even to have increased in number of species, though on the whole the flora of our modern woods is much less rich than those of the Miocene and Eocene, or even than that of the Later Cretaceous. The early Tertiary periods were, as we know, times of exuberant and gigantic animal life on the land, and it is in connection with this that the vegetable world seems to have attained its greatest variety and luxuriance. Even that early post-glacial age in which primitive man seems first to have spread himself over our continents was one richer both in animal and plant life than the present. The geographical changes which closed this period and inaugurated the modern era seem to have reduced not only the area of the continents but the variety of land life in a very remarkable manner. Thus our last lesson from the genesis and migrations of plants is the humbling one that the present world is by no means the best possible in so far as richness of vegetable and animal life is concerned.

Reference has been made to the utility of fossil plants as evidence of climate; but the subject deserves more detailed notice. I have often pondered on the nature of the climate evidenced by the floras of the Devonian and Carboniferous; but the problem is a difficult one, not only because of the peculiar character of the plants themselves, so unlike those of our time, but because of the probably different meteorological conditions of the period. It is easy to see that a flora of tree-ferns, great lycopods and pines is more akin to that of oceanic islands in warm latitudes than anything else that we know. But the Devonian and Carboniferous plants did not flourish in oceanic islands, but for the most part on continental areas of considerable dimensions, though probably more flat and less elevated than those of the present day. They also grew, from Arctic latitudes, almost, if not altogether, to the equator; and though there are generic differences in the plants of these periods inthe southern hemisphere, yet these do not affect the general facies. There are, for example, characteristic Lepidodendroids in the Devonian and Carboniferous of Brazil, Australia, and South Africa. If now we consider the plants a little more in detail, coniferous and taxine trees grow now in very different latitudes and climates. There is therefore nothing so very remarkable in their occurrence. The great group of Cordaites may have been equally hardy; but it is noteworthy that their geographical distribution is more limited. In Europe, for example, they are more characteristic in France than in Great Britain. Ferns and Lycopods and Mare's-tails are also cosmopolitan, but the larger species belong to the warmer climates, and nowhere at present do they become so woody and so complex in structure as they were in the older geological periods. At the present day, however, they love moisture rather than aridity, and uniformity of temperature rather than extreme light and heat. The natural inference would be that in these older periods geographical and other conditions must have conspired to produce a uniform and moist climate over a large portion of the continents. The geographical conditions of the Carboniferous age, and the distribution of animal life on the sea and land, confirm the conclusion based on the flora. Further, if, as seems probable, there was a larger proportion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than at present, this would not only directly affect the growth of plants, but would impede radiation, and so prevent escape of heat by that means, while the moisture exhaled from inland seas and lagoons and vastly extended swamps, would tend in the same direction.

It would, however, be a mistake to infer that there were not local differences of climate. I have elsewhere[109]advocated the theory that the great ridge of boulders, the New Glasgow conglomerate, which forms one margin of the coal field of Picton,in Nova Scotia, is an ice-formed ridge separating the area of accumulation of the great thirty-six feet seam from an outer area in which aqueous conditions prevailed, and little coal was formed. In this case, an ice-laden sea, carrying boulders on its floes and fields of ice, must have been a few miles distant from forests of Lepidodendra, Cordaites, and Sigillariæ, and the climate must have been anything but warm, at least at certain seasons. Nor have we a right to infer that the growth of the coal-plants was rapid. Stems, with woody axes and a thick bark, containing much fibrous and thick-walled cellular tissue, are not to be compared with modern succulent plants, especially when we consider the sparse and rigid foliage of many of them. Our conclusion should, therefore, be that geographical conditions and the abundance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere favoured a moist climate and uniform temperature, and that the flora was suited to these conditions.

[109]"Acadian Geology," Carboniferous of Picton.

As to the early Mesozoic flora, I have already suggested that it must have been an invader from the south, for which the intervening Permian age had made way by destroying the Palæozoic flora. This was probably effected by great earth-movements changing geographical conditions. But in the Mesozoic the old conditions to some extent returned, and the Carboniferous plants being extinct, their places were taken by pines, lycopods, and ferns, whose previous home had been in the insular regions of the tropics, and which, as climatal conditions improved, pushed their way to the Arctic circle. But, being derivatives of warm regions, their vitality and capacity for variation were not great, and they only locally and in favourable conditions became great coal producers. The new flora of the Later Cretaceous and the Tertiary, as previously stated, originated in the Arctic, and marched southward.

These newer Cretaceous plants presented from the first the generic aspects of modern vegetation, and so enable us much better to gauge their climatal conditions. In general, they donot indicate tropical heat in the far north, but only that of the warm temperate zone; but this in some portions of the period certainly extends to the middle of Greenland, unless, without any evidence, we suppose that the Cretaceous and lower Tertiary plants differed in hardiness of constitution from their modern representatives. They prove, however, considerable oscillations of climate. Gardner, Nathorst and Reid have shown this in Europe, and that it extends from the almost tropical flora of the lower Eocene to the Arctic flora of the Pleistocene. In America, owing, as Grey has suggested, to its great north and south extension, the changes were more regular and gradual. In the warmer periods of the Cretaceous, the flora as far north as 55° was similar to that of Georgia and Northern Florida at the present day, while in the cooler period of the Laramie (Lower Eocene, or more probably Paleocene) it was not unlike that of the Middle States. In the Pleistocene, the flora indicates a boreal temperature in the Glacial age. Thus there are no very extreme contrasts, but the evident fact of a warm temperate or subtropical climate extending very far north at the same times when Greenland had a temperate climate. As I have elsewhere shown,[110]discoveries in various parts of North America are beginning to indicate the precise geographical conditions accompanying the warmer and colder climates.

[110]Trans. Royal Society of Canada, 1890-1.

It would be wrong to leave this subject without noticing that remarkable feature in the southward movement of the later floras, to which I believe Prof. Gray was the first to direct attention. In those periods when a warm climate prevailed in the Arctic regions, the temperate flora must have been, like the modern Arctic flora, circumpolar. When obliged to migrate to the south, it had to follow the lines of the continents, and so to divide into separate belts. Three of these at present are the floras of Western Europe, Eastern Asia, and Eastern America, all of which have many representativespecies. They are separated by oceans and by belts of land occupied by plants which have not been obliged to migrate. Thus, while the flora of the Eastern United States resembles that of China and Japan, that of California and Oregon is distinct from both, and represents a belt of old species retained in place by the continued warmth of the Pacific shore, and the continuous extension of the American continent to the south affording them means of retreat in the Glacial age. Were the plants of China and Eastern America enabled to return to the Arctic, they would then reunite into one flora. Gray compares the process of their separation to the kind of selection which might be made by a botanical distributor who had the whole collection placed in his hands, with instructions to give one species of each genus to Europe, to Eastern Asia, and to Eastern America; and if there was only one species in a genus, or if one remained over, this was to be thrown into one of the regions, with a certain preference in favour of America and Asia. This remarkable kind of geographical selection opens a wide field not only for thought, but for experiment on the actual relationship of the representative species. There is a similar field for comparison between the trees of Georgia in latitude 30° to 35°, and the same species or their representatives as they existed in Cretaceous times in the latitudes of 50° and 60°. The two floras, as I know from actual comparison, are very similar.

One word may be said here as to use of fossil plants in determining geological time. In this I need only point to the fact of my having defined in Canada three Devonian floras, a Lower, Middle, and Upper, and that Mr. Whiteaves, in his independent study of the fossil fishes, has vindicated my conclusions. There are also in Nova Scotia three distinctive sub-floras of the Lower, Middle, and Upper Carboniferous.[111]Ihave verified these for the Devonian and Carboniferous of the United States, and to some extent also for those of Europe. To the same effect is the recognition of the Kootanie or Lower Cretaceous, the Middle Cretaceous, Upper Cretaceous, Laramie and Miocene in Western Canada. These have in all cases corresponded with the indications of animal fossils[112]and of stratigraphy. Fossil plants have been less studied in this connection than fossil animals, but I have no hesitation in affirming that, with reference to the broader changes of the earth's surface, any competent palæobotanist is perfectly safe in trusting to the evidence of vegetable fossils.

[111]Transactions Royal Society of Canada, 1883 to 1891.[112]Reports on Fossil Plants of the Devonian and Lower Carboniferous.

[111]Transactions Royal Society of Canada, 1883 to 1891.

[112]Reports on Fossil Plants of the Devonian and Lower Carboniferous.

It may be objected that such evidence will be affected by the migrations of plants, so that we cannot be certain that identical species flourished in Greenland and in temperate America at the same time. If such species originated in Greenland and migrated southward, the specimens found at the south may be much newer than those in the north. This, no doubt, is locally true, but the migrations of plants, though slow, occupy less time than that of a great geological period. It may also be objected that the flora of swamps, plains, and mountain tops would differ at any one period. This also is true, but the same difficulty applies to animals of the deep sea, the shore, and the land; and these diversities of station have always to be taken into account by the palæontologist.

References:—Report on the Erian or Devonian Plants of Canada, Montreal, 1871. Article in Princeton Review on Genesis and Migrations of Plants. "The Geological History of Plants," London and New York, 1888 and 1892. Papers on Fossil Plants of Western Canada, 1883, and following volumes of Transactions of Royal Society of Canada.

Note.—Since writing the above, I have obtained access to Dall and Harris' "Neocene Correlation Papers," which throw some additionallight on the Cretaceous and Eocene Floras of Alaska, which, from its high northern latitude, affords a good parallel to Greenland. It would appear that plant-beds occur in that territory at two horizons. One of these (Cape Beaufort), according to Lesquereux and Ward, holds species of Neocomian Age, and apparently equivalent to the Kootanie of British Columbia and the Komé of Greenland. The other, which occurs at several localities (Elukak, Port Graham, etc.), has a flora evidently of Laramie (Eocene) age, equivalent to the "Miocene" of Heer and Lesquereux, and to the Lignite Tertiary of Canada. The plants are accompanied by lignite, and evidentlyin situ, and clearly prove harmony with Greenland and British Columbia in two of the periods of high Arctic temperature indicated above.

DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OFDR. SCHIMPER,OF STRASBURG,The Author of "La Flore du Monde Primitif," andmany other Contributions to Fossil Botany,and ofDR. H. R. GOEPPERT,whose Essay on the Structure and Formation of Coalwas One of my first Guides in its Study.

Questions of Growth and Driftage—Testimony of a Block of Coal under the Microscope—Different Kinds of Coal—Conditions Necessary to Accumulation in Situ—Coal Beds and their Accompaniments—Underclays and Roofs—Vegetable Remains—History of Coal Groups—Summary of Evidence—Subsidence of Coal Areas—Stigmaria and other Coal Plants—Later Coal Accumulations—The Story and Uses of Coal

Part of a Coal Group, at the South Joggins, with underclays and erect trees and Calamites(p. 238).

THE GROWTH OF COAL.

My early boyhood was spent on the Coal formation rocks and in the vicinity of collieries; and among my first natural history collections, in a childish museum of many kinds of objects, were some impressions of fern leaves from the shales of the coal series. It came to pass in this way that the Carboniferous rocks were those which I first studied as an embryo geologist, and much of my later work has consisted in collecting and determining the plants of that ancient period, and in studying microscopic sections of coals and fossil woods accompanying them. For this reason, and because I have published so much on this subject, my first decision was to leave it out of these Salient Points: but on second thoughts it seemed that this might be regarded as a dereliction of duty; more especially as some of the conclusions supposed to be the best established on this subject have recently been called in question.

Had I been writing a few years ago, I might have referred to the mode of formation of coal as one of the things most surely settled and understood. The labours of many eminent geologists, microscopists and chemists in the old and the new worlds had shown that coal nearly always rests upon old soil-surfaces penetrated with roots, and that coal beds have in their roofs erect trees, the remains of the last forests that grew upon them. Logan and the writer have illustrated this in the case of the series of more than eighty successive coal beds exposed at theSouth Joggins, and of the great thirty feet seam of the Picton coal series, whose innumerable laminæ have all been subjected to careful scrutiny, and have shown unequivocal evidence of land surfaces accompanying the deposition of the coal. Microscopical examination has proved that these coals are composed of the materials of the same trees whose roots are found in the underclays, and their stems and leaves in the roof shales; that much of the material of the coal has been partially subjected to subaërial decay at the time of its accumulation; and that in this, ordinary coal differs from bituminous shale, earthy bitumen and some kinds of cannel, which have been formed under water; that the matter remaining as coal consists almost entirely of epidermal tissues, which being suberose or corky in character are highly carbonaceous, very durable and impermeable by water, and are, hence, the best fitted for the production of pure coal; and finally, that the vegetation and the climatal and geographical features of the coal period were eminently fitted to produce in the vast swamps of that period precisely the effects observed. All these points and many others have been thoroughly worked out for both European and American coal fields, and seemed to leave no doubt on the subject. But several years ago certain microscopists observed in slices of coal, thin layers full of spore cases, a not unusual circumstance, since these were shed in vast abundance by the trees of the coal forests, and because they contain suberose matter of the same character with epidermal tissues generally. Immediately we were informed that all coal consists of spores, and this being at once accepted by the unthinking, the results of the labours of many years are thrown aside in favour of this crude and partial theory. A little later, a German microscopist has thought proper to describe coal as made up of minute algæ, and tries to reconcile this view with the appearances, devising at the same time a new and formidable nomenclature of generic and specific names, which would seem largely to represent merefragments of tissues. Still later, some local facts in a French coal field have induced an eminent observer of that country to revive the drift theory of coal, in opposition to that of growthin situ. Views of this kind have also recently been advanced in England by some of those younger men who would earn distinction rather by overthrowing the work of their seniors than by building on it. These writers base their conclusions on a few exceptional facts, as the occasional occurrence of seams of coal without distinct underlays, and the occurrence of clay partings showing aquatic conditions in the substance of thick coals; and they fail to discern the broader facts which these exceptions confirm. Let us consider shortly the essential nature of coal, and some of the conditions necessary to its formation.

A block of the useful mineral which is so important an element in national wealth, and so essential to the comfort of our winter homes, may tell us much as to its history if properly interrogated, and what we cannot learn from it alone we may be taught by studying it in the mine whence it is obtained, and in the cliffs and cuttings where the edges of the coaly beds and their accompaniments are exposed.

Our block of coal, if anthracite, is almost pure carbon. If bituminous coal, it contains also a certain amount of hydrogen, which in combination with carbon enables it to yield gas and coal tar, and which causes it to burn with flame. If, again, we examine some of the more imperfect and more recent coals, the brown coals, so called, we shall find that in composition and texture they are intermediate between coal proper and hardened or compressed peat. Now such coaly rocks can, under the present constitution of nature, be produced only in one way, namely, by the accumulation of vegetable matter, for vegetation alone has the power of decomposing the carbonic acid of the atmosphere, and accumulating it as carbon. This we see in modern times in the vegetable soil, in peaty beds, and invegetable muck accumulated in ponds and similar places. Such vegetable matter, once accumulated, requires only pressure and the changes which come of its own slow putrefaction to be converted into coal.

But in order that it may accumulate at all, certain conditions are necessary. The first of these includes the climatal and organic arrangements necessary for abundant vegetable growth. The second is the facility for the preservation of the vegetable matter, without decay or intermixture with earthy substances; and this, for a long time, till a great thickness of it accumulates. The third is its covering up by other deposits, so as to be compressed and excluded from air. It is evident that when we have to consider the formation of a bed of coal several feet in thickness, and spread, perhaps, over hundreds of square miles, many things must conduce to such a result, and the wonder is perhaps rather that such conditions should ever have been effectively combined. Yet this has occurred at different periods of geological history and in many places, and in some localities it has been so repeated as to produce many beds of coal in succession.

Let us now question our block of coal as to its origin, supposing it to be a piece of ordinary bituminous coal, or still better, a specimen of one of the impure somewhat shaly coals which one sometimes finds accidentally in the coal bin. In looking at the edge of our specimen we observe that it has a "reed" or grain, which corresponds with the lamination or bedding of the seam of coal from which it came. Looking at this carefully, we shall see that there are many thin layers of bright shining coal, and the more of these usually the better the coal. These layers, in tracing them along, we observe often to thin out and disappear. They are not very continuous. If our specimen is an impure coal, we will find that it readily splits along the surfaces of these layers, and that when so split, we can see that each layer of shining coal has certain markings, perhaps the flattenedribs and scars of Sigillaria or other coal-formation trees on its surface. In other words, the layers of fine coal are usually flattened trunks and branches of trees, or perhaps rather of the imperishable and impermeable bark of such trees, the wood having perished. A few very thin layers of shining coal we may also find to consist of the large-ribbed leaves of the plant known as Cordaites. This kind of coaly matter then usually represents trunks of trees which in a prostrate and flattened state may constitute more than half of the bulk of ordinary coal-formation coal. Under the microscope this variety of coal shows little structure, and this usually the thickened cells of cortical tissue. Intervening between these layers we perceive lamina?, more or less thick and continuous, of what we may call dull coal, black but not shining; resembling, in fact, the appearance of cannel coal. If we split the coal along one side of these layers, and examine it in a strong light, we may see shreds of leaf stalks and occasionally even of fern leaves, or skeletons of these, showing the veins, and many flattened disc-like bodies, spore cases and macrospores, shed by the plants which make up the coal. These layers represent what may be called compressed vegetable mould or muck, and this is by no means a small constituent of many coals. This portion of the coal is the most curious and interesting in microscopic slices, showing a great variety of tissues and many spores and spore cases. Lastly, we find on the surface of the coal, when split parallel to the bedding, a quantity of soft shining fibrous material, known as mineral charcoal or mother coal, which in some varieties of the mineral is very abundant, in others much more rare. This is usually too soft and incoherent to be polished in thin slices for the microscope; but if boiled for a length of time in nitric acid, so as to separate all the mineral matter contained in it, the fibres sometimes become beautifully translucent and reveal the tissues of the wood of various kinds of Carboniferous trees, more especially of Calamites, Cordaites and Sigillariæ. Fibresof mineral charcoal prepared in this way are often very beautiful microscopic objects under high powers; and this material of the coal is nothing else than little blocks of rotten wood and fibrous bark, broken up and scattered over the surface of the forming coal bed. All these materials, it must be observed, have been so compressed that the fragments of decayed wood have been flattened into films, the vegetable mould consolidated into a stony mass, and trunks of great trees converted by enormous pressure into laminæ of shining coal, a tenth of an inch in thickness, so that the whole material has been reduced to perhaps one-hundredth of its original volume.

Restoring the mass in imagination to its original state, what do we find? A congeries of prostate trunks with their interstices filled with vegetable muck or mould, and occasional surfaces where rotten wood, disintegrated into fragments, was washed about in local floods or rain storms, and thus thrown over the surface. Lyell seems very nearly to have hit the mark when he regarded the conditions of the great dismal swamp of Virginia as representing those of a nascent coal field. We have only to realize in the coal period the existence of a dense vegetation very different from that of modern Virginia, of a humid and mild climate, and of a vast extension of low swampy plains, to restore the exact conditions of the coal swamps.

But how does this correspond with the facts observed in mines and sections? To the late Sir William Logan is due the merit of observing that in South Wales the underclays or beds of indurated clay and earth underlying the coal seams are usually filled with the long cylindrical rootlets and branching roots of a curious plant, very common in the coal formation, the Stigmaria. He afterwards showed that the same fact occurs in the very numerous coal beds exposed in the fine section cut by the tides of the Bay of Fundy, in the coal rocks of Nova Scotia. In that district I have myself followed uphis observations, examining in detail every one of eighty-one Coal Groups, as I have called them, each consisting of at least one bed of coal, large or small, with its accompaniments, and in many cases of several small seams with intervening clays or shales.[113]In nearly every case the Stigmaria "underclay" is distinctly recognisable, and often in a single coal group there are several small seams separated by underclays with roots and rootlets. These underclays are veritable fossil soils; sometimes bleached clays or sands, like the subsoils of modern swamps; sometimes loamy or sandy, or of the nature of hardened vegetable mould. They rarely contain any remains of aquatic animals, or of animals of any kind, but are filled with stigmaria roots and rootlets, and sometimes hold a few prostrate stems of trees.[114]While the underclay is thus a fossil soil, the roof or bed above the coal, usually of a shaly character, is full of remains of leaves and stems and fruits, and often holds erect stumps, the remains of the last trees that grew in the swamp before it was finally covered up.

[113]For details seeJournal Geol. Society of London, 1865; and "Acadian Geology," last edition, 1891.[114]At the South Joggins, in two or three cases, beds of bituminous shale full of Naiadites and Cyprids have by elevation and drying become fit for the growth of trees with stigmaria roots; but this is quite exceptional, no doubt arising from the accidental draining of lakes or lagoons on their elevation above the sea level.

[113]For details seeJournal Geol. Society of London, 1865; and "Acadian Geology," last edition, 1891.

[114]At the South Joggins, in two or three cases, beds of bituminous shale full of Naiadites and Cyprids have by elevation and drying become fit for the growth of trees with stigmaria roots; but this is quite exceptional, no doubt arising from the accidental draining of lakes or lagoons on their elevation above the sea level.

Some of the thinnest coals, and some beds so thin and impure that they can scarcely be called coals at all, are the most instructive. Witness the following from my section of the South Joggins.

Coal Group 1, of Division 3, is the highest of the series. Its section is as follows:—

"Grey argillaceous shale.Coal, 1 inch.Grey argillaceous underclay, Stigmaria.

"The roof holds abundance of fern leaves (Alethopterislonchitica). The coal is coarse and earthy, with much epidermal and bast tissue, spore cases, etc., vascular bundles of ferns and impressions of bark of Sigillaria and leaves of Cordaites. It may be considered as a compressed vegetable soil resting on a subsoil full of rootlets of Stigmaria." In this case the coal is an inch in thickness, but there are many beds where the coal is a mere film, and supports great erect stems of Sigillaria, sending downward their roots in the form of branching Stigmariæ into the underclay, thus proving that the Stigmariæ of the underclays are the roots of the Sigillariæ of the coals and their roofs.

Here is another example which may be called a coal group, and is No. 11 of the same division:

"Grey argillaceous shale, erect Calamites.Coal, 1 inch.Grey argillaceous underclay, Stigmaria, 1 ft. 6 in.Coal, 2 inches.Grey argillaceous underclay, Stigmaria, 4 in.Coal, 1 inch.Grey argillaceous underclay, Stigmaria.

"This is an alternation of thin, coarse coals with fossil soils. The roof shale contains erect Calamites, which seem to have been the last vegetation which grew on the surface of the upper coal."

Such facts, with many minor varieties, extend through the whole eighty-one coal groups of this remarkable section, as any one may see by referring to the paper and work cited in the preceding note. It is possibly because in most coal fields the smaller and commercially useless beds are so little open to observation, that so crude ideas derived merely from imperfect access to the beds that are worked exist among geologists. The following summary of facts may perhaps serve to place the evidence as to the mode of accumulation of coal fairly before the reader:—

(1) The occurrence of Stigmaria under nearly every bed of coal proves, beyond question, that the material was accumulated by growthin situ, while the character of the sediments intervening between the beds of coal proves with equal certainty the abundant transport of mud and sand by water. In other words, conditions similar to those of the swampy deltas of great rivers, or the swampy flats of the interiors of great continents, are implied.

(2) The true coal consists principally of the flattened bark of sigillaroid and other trees, intermixed with leaves of ferns andCordaites, and other herbaceousdébris, including vast numbers of spores and spore cases, and with fragments of decayed wood constituting "mineral charcoal," all their materials having manifestly alike grown and accumulated where we find them.

(3) The microscopical structure and chemical composition of the beds of cannel coal and earthy bitumen, and of the more highly bituminous and carbonaceous shales, show them to have been of the nature of the fine vegetable mud which accumulates in the ponds and shallow lakes of modern swamps. These beds are always distinct from true subaërial coal. When such fine vegetable sediment is mixed, as is often the case, with mud, it becomes similar to the bituminous limestone and calcareo-bituminous shales of the coal measures.

(4) A few of the underclays which support beds of coal are of the nature of the vegetable mud above referred to; but the greater part are argillo-arenaceous in composition, with little vegetable matter, and bleached by the drainage from them of water containing the products of vegetable decay. They are, in short, loamy or clay soils in the chemical condition in which we find such soils under modern bogs, and must have been sufficiently above water to admit of drainage. The absence, or small quantity of sulphides, and the occurrence of carbonate of iron in connection with them, prove thatwhen they existed as soils, rain water, and not sea water, percolated them.

(5) The coal and the fossil trees present many evidences of subaërial conditions. Most of the erect and prostrate trees had become hollow shells of bark before they were finally imbedded, and their wood had broken into cubical pieces of mineral charcoal. Land snails and galley worms (Xylobius) crept into them, and they became dens or traps for reptiles. Large quantities of mineral charcoal occur on the surfaces of all the larger beds of coal. None of these appearances could have been produced by subaqueous action.

(6) Though the roots ofSigillariabear some resemblance to the rhizomes of certain aquatic plants, yet structurally they have much resemblance to the roots of Cycads, which the stems also resemble. Further, theSigillariægrew on the same soils which supported conifers,Lepidodendra,Cordaites, and ferns, plants which could not have grown in water. Again, with the exception, perhaps, of somePinnulariæandAsterophyllites, and Rhizocarpean spores, there is a remarkable absence from the coal measures of any form of properly aquatic vegetation.

(7) The occasional occurrence of marine or brackish-water animals in the roofs of coal beds, or even in the coal itself, affords no evidence of subaqueous accumulation, since the same thing occurs in the case of modern submarine forests. Such facts merely imply that portions of the areas of coal accumulation were liable to inundation of a character so temporary as not finally to close the process, as happened when at last a roof shale was deposited by water over the coal. Cannel coals and bituminous shales holding mussel-like shells, fish scales, etc., imply the existence sometimes for long periods of ponds, lakes or lagoons in the coal swamps, but ordinary coal did not accumulate in these. It is in the cannels and similar subaqueous coals that the macrospores which Iattribute in great part to aquatic plants, allied to modern Salvinia, etc., are chiefly found.[115]

[115]"Geological History of Plants,"Bulletin Chicago Academy of Sciences, 1886.

For these and other reasons, some of which are more fully stated in the papers referred to, while I admit that the areas of coal accumulation were frequently submerged, I must maintain that the true coal is a subaërial accumulation by vegetable growth on soils wet and swampy, it is true, but not submerged. I would add the further consideration, already urged elsewhere, that in the case of the fossil forests associated with the coal, the conditions of submergence and silting-up which have preserved the trees as fossils, must have been precisely those which were fatal to their existence as living plants, a fact sufficiently evident to us in the case of modern submarine forests, but often overlooked by the framers of theories of the accumulation of coal.

It seems strange that the occasional inequalities of the floors of the coal beds, the sand or gravel ridges which traverse them, the channels cut through the coal, the occurrence of patches of sand, and the insertion of wedges of such material splitting the beds, have been regarded by some able geologists as evidences of the aqueous origin of coal. In truth, these appearances are of constant occurrence in modern swamps and marshes, more especially near their margins, or where they are exposed to the effects of ocean storms or river inundations. The lamination of the coal has also been adduced as a proof of aqueous deposition; but the miscroscope shows, as I have elsewhere pointed out, that this is entirely different from aqueous lamination, and depends on the superposition of successive generations of more or less decayed trunks of trees and beds of leaves. The lamination in the truly aqueous cannels and carbonaceous shales is of a very different character.

It is scarcely necessary to remark that in the above summaryI have had reference principally to my own observations in the coal formation of Nova Scotia; but similar facts have been detailed by many other observers in other districts.[116]

[116]Especially Brongniart, Goeppert, Hawkshaw, Lyell, Logan, De la Boche, Beaumont, Binney, Rogers, Lesquereux, Williamson, Grand' Eury.

A curious point in connection with the origin of coal is the question how could vegetable matter be accumulated in such a pure condition? There is less difficulty in regard to this if we consider the coal as a swamp accumulationin situ. It is in this way that the purest vegetable accumulations take place at present, whereas in lakes and at the mouths of rivers vegetable matter is always mixed up with mud. Coal swamps, however, must have been liable to submergences or to temporary inundations, and it is no doubt to these that we have to attribute the partings of argillaceous matter often found in coal beds, as well as the occasional gulches cut into the coal and filled with sand and lenticular masses of earthy matter. To a similar cause we must also attribute the association of cannel with ordinary coal. The cannel is really a pulpy, macerate mass of vegetable matter accumulated in still water, surrounded and perhaps filled with growing aquatic herbage. Hence it is in such beds that we find the greatest accumulations of macrospores, derived, probably, in great part from aquatic plants. Buckland long ago compared the matter of cannel to the semi-fluid discharge of a bursting bog, and Alex. Agassiz has more recently shown that in times of flood the vegetable muck of the Everglades of Florida flows out in thick inky streams, and may form large beds of vegetable matter having the character of the materials of cannel. It is evident that in swamps of so great extent as those of the coal formation, there must have been shallow lakes and ponds, and wide sluggish streams, forming areas for the accumulation of vegetabledébrisand this readily accounts for the association of ordinary beds of coal with those of cannel, and with bituminous shales orearthy bitumen, as well as for the occurrence of scales of fish and other aquatic animals in such beds. Lyell's interesting observation of the submerged areas at New Madrid, keeping free of Mississippi mud, because fringed with a filter of cane-brake, shows that the areas of coal accumulation might often be inundated without earthy deposit, if, as seems probable, they were fringed with dense brakes of calamites, sheltering them from the influx of muddy water. It seems also certain that the water of the coal areas would be brown and laden with imperfect vegetable acids, like that of modern bogs, and such water has usually little tendency to deposit any mineral matter, even in the pores of vegetable fragments. The only exception to this is one which also occurs in modern swamps, namely, the tendency to deposit iron, either as carbonate (Clay Ironstone), or sulphide (Iron Pyrite), both of which are products of modern bogs, and equally characteristic of the coal swamps.

Where great accumulations of sediment are going on, as at the mouths of modern rivers, there is a tendency to subsidence of the area of the deposit, owing to its weight. This applies, perhaps, to a greater extent to coal areas. Thus the area of a coal swamp would ultimately sink so low as to be overflowed, and a roof shale would be deposited to bury up the bed of coal, and transmit it to future ages, chemically, and mechanically changed by pressure and by that slow decomposition which gradually converts vegetable matter into carbon and hydrocarbons. The long continuance and great extent of these alternations of growth and subsidence is perhaps the most extraordinary fact of all. At the South Joggins, if we include the surfaces having erect trees with those having beds of coal, the process of growth of a forest or bog, and its burial by subsidence and deposition must have been repeated about a hundred times before the final burial of the whole under the thick sandstones of the Upper Carboniferous and Permian.

Mention has been made of Sigillaria and other trees of the coal formation period. These trees and others allied to them, of which there were many kinds, may be likened to gigantic club mosses, which they resembled in fruit and foliage, though vastly more complex in structure of stem and branch. Some of them, perhaps, were of much higher rank than any of the modern plants most nearly allied to them. One of their most remarkable features was that of their roots—those Stigmariæ, to which so frequent reference has been made. They differed from modern roots, not only in some points of structure, but in their regular bifurcation, and in having huge root fibres articulated to the roots, and arranged in a regular spiral manner, like leaves. They radiate regularly from a single stem, and do not seem to have sent up buds or secondary stems. They thus differed from the botanical definition of a root, and also from that of a rhizoma, or root stock; being, in short, a primitive and generalized contrivance, suited to trees themselves primitive and generalized, and to special and peculiar circumstances of growth. Some botanists have imagined that they were aquatic plants, growing at the bottom of lakes, but their mode of occurrence negatives this. I have elsewhere stated this as follows:—[117]

Back to Index Next