67 
_ Basin, and Mr. Willett’s collection from Wookey Hole, contained 
specimens of undoubted Coprolites. 
Mr. HOWELL expressed himself in favour of Mr. Sewell’s views. 
Mr. PANKHURST thought from the paper that Messrs. Scott and 
Wonfor held views of a very antagonistic nature to those of Mr. 
Sewell, but, it appeared, both admitted Coprolites. The point at issue 
was, were they of mineral or organic origin? The case seemed to 
him made out in favour of the latter. 
Mr. B. LOMAX pointed out how far conjecture from imperfect data 
might be from the actual truth of the origin. It was true that the 
scales of fish were found in the one set of fossils and not in the other ; 
but might not this be accounted for by supposing that the latter 
_ animals had not a chance of eating the same kind of fish ? 
Mr. SEWELL, in reply, said that his paper was based on the idea that 
the term Coprolite would be understood on the opposite side in its 
strictest meaning. 
JuNe 26TH. 
MICROSCOPICAL MEETING.—GENERAL EVENING. 
Mr. Wonror called attention to some slides, the cells of which 
were made of different coloured cements ; in some, the cell was built 
up with a white cement and finished off with concentric rings of 
different colours, presenting an appearance of what might to some 
appear a pretty cell; but, apart from this, a material new to the 
generality of microscopists had been employed. Dr. Hallifax, to 
_ whom he shewed them some little time since, had been experimenting, 
and had not only produced slides similar in appearance, but had 
_ obtained what he considered a trustworthy cement. 
He would, therefore, suggest that “ Cements ” form the subject of 
: - the next Microscopical Meeting, and that Dr. Hallifax be asked to give 
