356 The Scottish Naturalist. 



passions of some of those who believe it to be native, seeing that 

 such a criticism or analysis would have the effect of exposing the 

 pitiable want of proof, or anything thereto approaching, that has 

 as yet characterised the advocacy of its Scotch nativity. 



3. A good deal remains to be said concerning the supposed 

 nativity of the Gemmell specimen, including a good deal that is 

 new; for there can be little doubt that the public discussions re- 

 garding it that have been above adverted to have already led to 

 careful gold-prospecting of theWanlockhead district, and will direct 

 attention to the possible occurrence of aurifei-ous quartz in other 

 parts of Scotland. The Gemmell specimen, indeed, raises ques- 

 tions of such importance, not only to the mineralogist or geolo- 

 gist, but to the historian, archaeologist, and jurist, and to all who 

 are interested in the development of the industrial resources of 

 Scotland, that these questions will require at some future date 

 a special paper, or perhaps a series of papers, for their due 

 discussion.^ 



At a meeting of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in March last 

 (1878), much stress was laid on the value and significance of the 

 Jameson specimeju Mr Dudgeon of Cargen mentioned " the fact 

 that there had been for many years, in the Museum of Science 

 and Art, a specimen (of auriferous quartz) labelled Wanlockhead. 

 This quartz was in the collection at the time of Professor Jame- 

 son \ and it was perfectly certain that, had there been doubt as 

 to its real character, it would not have been admitted to the 

 Museum by so eminent a mineralogist." Professor Archer, 

 Director of the Museum, remarked in confirmation : " It was 

 scarcely necessary ... to say that Professor Jameson was not 

 likely in his time to admit an Australian specimen ; and he (Pro- 

 fessor Archer) did not hesitate to say that any one who looked at 

 the two specimens (the Jameson and Gemmell ones) would be 

 convinced that they were got at the same place "^ — viz., Wan- 

 lockhead. No doubt it is true that " Professor Jameson was not 

 likely, in his time., to admit an Aiistralian specimen " of gold- 

 quartz into the Natural History Museum of the University of 

 Edinburgh, because the Australian gold-diggings did not begin 

 till 185 1 ;^ while in 1847, when I attended what should have been 



(( 



^ Mr Cochran-Patrick's judicial verdict on the Gemmell specimen is this : 



Mr Dudgeon of Cargen , . . figures a mass of quartz and gold, which was 



supposed to have been found near Wanlockhead, though some doubt has been 



thrown on its native origin." — 'Early^Rccords,' Introduction, p. xx, footnote. 



2 ' Scotsman,' March 5, 1S78. » Vide Calvert's 'Gold Rocks,' p. 18. 



