280 Dr Hisszert on the Limestone of Kirkton. 
hibits may be estimated at two to three yards, but in tracing it to the part of the 
quarry where it disappears, it may be observed to thin off to as many inches. 
The inference is, that the calcareous matter was elaborated on the site of Kirk- 
‘ton in the form of hot springs, probably at the time in a state of ebullition. I need 
not add, that this is a phenomenon perfectly familiar at the present day in districts 
where the volcanic agency is still in activity.* 
This limestone, as I have remarked, contains plants, among which is'a beautiful 
Pecopteris, which I have transmitted for description to Professor Linpirey and Mr 
Horton, to be inserted in their British Flora. 
It could scarcely be expected that this limestone should contain any animal re- 
mains, but, to my surprise, some most singular creatures have turned up 
No fewer than five specimens were at one time discovered of a crustaceous animal 
of extraordinary large dimensions. Unfortunately, these specimens in their broken 
state were’soon dispersed. A very able naturalist of Glasgow, Dr Scouurr, at pre- 
sent Professor of Mineralogy in the University of Dublin, obtained the sight of a 
portion only of one of these animals, which he described under the name of Eidothea. 
(Edinburgh Journal of Natural and Geographical Science, vol. iii. p. 352.) 
When my account of the limestone of Kirkton was made known through the 
journals, public attention was directed to its singular character, and, as a conse- 
quence, more of these dispersed remains were brought to light, particularly by Dr 
Reip and Dr Simrsoy, severally of Bathgate. The last named gentleman allowed 
me to exhibit the relics in his possession at a Sectional meeting of the British 
Association of Science ; and Mr Smiru of Jordanhill then brought forward the head 
of the animal described by Dr Scouter. 
In Plate XII. figs. 1. and 2. shew both sides of the animal. Fig. 3. is the head 
alluded to; while figs. 4. and 5. are the two sides of an extremity, apparently refer- 
able to the same specimen. 
Upon this occasion Mr Torrie of Edinburgh was so obliging as to place in my 
* In concluding my mineralogical account of this deposit, I would observe, that my intelligent 
young friend, Dr Simpson of Bathgate, was the first to inform me, after the reading of my paper, that 
the limestone of Kirkton had been noticed in an article by Dr Fremtne, published in the Edinburgh 
Journal of Science for April 1825, (p. 307.) In this’ paper, a brief allusion is made to the siliceous la- 
minze of the limestone, as well as to its botryoidal and mammillary structure. It is also stated, that 
‘¢ several trunks of trees with their branches” had turned up, in which concentric zones and perpendi- 
cular fibres were visible. Dr Firemr1ne’s remark, that this limestone “ encloses the remains of those 
tnarine animals which are common in the limestones of the coal formation,” I consider as a mistake. 
The memoir is entitled, “ On the Neptunian formation of Siliceous Stalactites.” It is almost entirely 
theoretical} being a defence, in reference to siliceous developments, of the doctrine taught by WERNER. 
I may also add, that since an abstract of this memoir appeared in print, Mr Macranren of Edin- 
burgh has.published (in the Scotsman) some very ingenious observations upon the trap-rocks in the 
immediate vicinity of this thermal deposit, in which their stratified character is advocated. I am sorry 
that the extreme length of my memoir prevents me from entering ‘into an explanation of his views, 
and from expressing my own opinion regarding them. 
