130. The system of LAZZARO MORO has been remarked as approaching nearer to this theory than any other; and it is certain, that one very important principle is common to them both. The theory of the Italian geologist was chiefly directed to the explanation of the remains of marine animals, which are found in mountains far from the sea; and it appears to have been suggested to him by the phenomena of the _Campi Phlegræi_, and by the production of the new island of _Santorini_ in the Archipelago. He accordingly supposes, that the islands and continents have been all raised up, like the above-mentioned island, from the bottom of the sea, by the force of volcanic fire: that these fires began to burn under the bottom of the ocean, soon after the creation of the world, when as yet the ocean covered the whole earth: that they at first elevated a portion of the land; and in this primitive land no shells are found, as the original ocean was destitute of fish. The volcanoes continuing to burn, under the sea, after the creation of animated nature, the strata that were then raised up by their action were full of shells and other marine objects; and, from the violence with which they were elevated, arose the contortions and inclined position which they frequently possess.[39] [Footnote 39: Dé Crostacei, et degli altri Marini Corpi, che si trovano su' Monti: di Ant. Lazzaro Moro. Venezia. 1740.] This system is imperfect, as it makes no peculiar provision for the consolidation of the strata, which, according to it, as well as the Neptunian system, must be ascribed to the action, not of fire, but of water. No account is given of the mineralization of the shells found in the strata, or of the difference between them and the shells found loose at the bottom of the sea; and no distinction is made between stratified and unstratified substances. But, with all this, Lazzaro Moro has certainly the merit of having perceived, that some other power than that which deposited the strata, must have been employed for their elevation, and that they have endured the action of a disturbing force. 131. From this comparison it appears, that Dr Hutton's theory is sufficiently distinct, even from the theories which approach to it most nearly, to merit, in the strictest sense, the appellation of _new_ and _original_. There are indeed few inventions or discoveries, recorded in the history of science, to which nearer approaches were not made before they were fully unfolded. It therefore very well deserves to be distinguished by a particular name; and, if it behoves us to follow the analogy observed in the names of the two great systems, which at present divide the opinions of geologists, we may join Mr Kirwan in calling this the PLUTONIC SYSTEM. For my own part, I would rather have it characterized by a less splendid, but juster name, that of the HUTTONIAN THEORY.