170 NATURAL SCIENCE [March 



Charleswortli's famous memoir on the Crag was published in 

 the London and Edinburgh Pltil. Mag., vol. xxxviii. p. 81, August 

 1835. 



The results obtained by Charlesworth were soon after 

 examined by Lyell, who in a paper read before the Geological 

 Society in 1839, accepted his views, and proceeded to apply his 

 own numerical and proportionate method to them. This led him 

 to perform curious somersaults in nomenclature. As we have seen 

 in his first arrangement of the Tertiaries, he put the Crag into his 

 " Older Pliocene," leaving the " Newer Pliocene " without an English 

 representative. 



He now entirely altered this view in a most revolutionary 

 manner, and while he retained the Norwich Crag in his older 

 Pliocene, he transferred the lied Crag and the Coralline Crag to 

 " different parts of the Miocene," while he put the testacea of the 

 fresh water or fluviatile deposits of Cromer and Mundesley in 

 Norfolk, Sutton, Grays, Ilford, kc, into his Newer Pliocene {Proc. 

 Geol. Soc, vol. iii. pp. 129 and 130). In this paper Lyell co- 

 ordinates the older crags of East Anglia with the Faluns of 

 Touraine as Desnoyer had done. This he did again on what I 

 deem the same irrational ground, that the proportion of extinct to 

 recent forms in both was pretty nearly the same. How false and 

 misleading such a comparison must be, is shown by the fact that 

 Searles Wood only found 10 per cent, of the shells connnon to the 

 Crag and the Faluns, thus proving that the two sets of beds really 

 belong to two entirely different geological provinces, and ought to 

 be classified under separate names. 



Again, as we have seen, the shells in the diluvium or drift were 

 originally treated as part of the Crag, a view to which some of us 

 have returned. In November 1836, Mr James Smith of Jordan- 

 hill, another of the excellent pioneers of geology, first definitely 

 separated the shell-bearing drifts of Scotland and placed them 

 among the ' Newer Pliocene' (Proc. Geol. Soc, vol. ii. p. 428). In 

 February of the following year Mr Clarke similarly separated the 

 diluvium from the Crag of East Anglia. 



In November 1839, Mr James Smith went further and separated 

 the true slielly drift of Scotland, called glacial by some, and to 

 which he now gave the name pleistocene (this being apparently the 

 first time the name is used in England), from the submerged forests 

 and sandbeaches there which he calls post-Tertiary (Ed. iii., 149 

 and 150). 



In their paper on the geology of Kussia ]iy Murchison and Vern- 

 neuil in 1841, they applied the same name post-pleiocenc or pleistocene 

 to the so-called diluvium or drift, inclusive of the marine surface 

 shell-beds of Northern Eussia, whose contents were correlated with 



