3. There are no means furnished by the hypothesis of submarine volcanoes for bringing the basalt, and the strata which cover it, above the level of the sea. If it is said that the waters of the sea have been drained off, the objections are all incurred that have been stated at § 37.[130] If it is said, that the rocks themselves have been elevated by a force, impelling them upwards, we say, that the existence of such a force, when admitted, furnishes another means of explaining the whole phenomenon, namely, that of the injection of melted matter among the strata, the same that is used in the Huttonian Theory. [Footnote 130: Dolomieu adopts this supposition; he thinks, that the surface of the sea must have been formerly 500 or 600 toises above its present level. _Ibid._ p. 196.] 4. The phenomena of basaltic veins are not in the least explained by the hypothesis of submarine volcanoes. That hypothesis, then, even if the foregoing objections were removed, does not serve to explain all the facts respecting the rocks of this genus, and wants, of consequence, one of the most important characters of a true theory. It must be allowed, however, that it makes a considerable approach to such a theory, and that the submarine volcanoes of Dolomieu, have an affinity to the unerupted lavas of Dr Hutton. 245. Though in these remarks I have endeavoured to expose the errors of the volcanic system, I cannot but consider that system as coming infinitely nearer to the truth than the Neptunian. It has the merit of distinguishing an order of rocks, which bears no marks of aqueous formation, and in which the crystallized, sparry, or lava-like structure, bespeaks their primeval fluidity, and refers their origin to fire. The Neptunian system, on the other hand, strives to confound the most marked distinction in the mineral kingdom, and to explain the formation, both of the stratified and unstratified rocks, by the operation of the same element. Though chargeable with this inconsistency, it has become the prevailing system of geology; and the arguments which support it are therefore entitled to attention. 246. It will no doubt be thought singular, that the same mineralogist, whom we have just seen exerting his ingenuity in defence of the volcanic system, should now appear equally strenuous in defence of the Neptunian. Though Dolomieu contends for the volcanic origin of some basaltic rocks, he does not admit that all basaltes is volcanic, nor even all of igneous formation. Thus he states, that he had examined at Rome some of the most ancient monuments of art, executed in basaltes, brought from Upper Egypt, and that he could discover no mark of the action of fire in any of them.[131] [Footnote 131: Journal de Physique, tome xxxvii. (1790,) partie 2, p. 193.]