590 Chronicles of Science. [Oct., 
in which two distinct “asbestiform layers” are seen superimposed 
on one another, and again in which the fibres are in some places 
parallel and in others divergent. They also raise a much more im- 
portant issue: they say that the fibres are indefinitely fibrous, in 
other words, that each fibre, when examined with as high a power 
as is practicable, is resolved into fibres, each similar to what the 
original fibre itself appears to be under a lower power. They 
therefore consider this “ asbestiform” layer to be of inorganic origin, 
and composed of chrysotile or some similar mineral. 
Messrs. King and Rowney meet Dr. Carpenter on other grounds, 
without, in some cases, knowing that the points had been raised by 
the latter naturalist. But it would be tedious to mention all the 
structures which are differently described by the advocates of 
the opposite views, so we refer those interested im the subject to the 
papers themselves. 
Treating the, question geologically, Messrs. King and Rowney 
state that they have observed the same structures in serpentinous 
limestone of Laurentian, probably Cambrian, Lower Silurian (Con- 
nemara), possibly Devonian, and certainly Liassic (Skye) age, and 
they ask how this fact can be reconciled with its organic origin? 
The answer to this question might not be difficult; but we must 
confess that the remarkable fact of Eozoonal structures being found 
only in serpentinous limestones, and not in pure limestones, to 
which Messrs. King and Rowney also draw attention, is a far 
ereater anomaly. According to Dr. Carpenter, however, Dr. Daw- 
son has at last succeeded in detecting Eozoon in pure limestone. 
Whichever way this question of the origin of Hozoon may 
ultimately be solved, we cannot help thinking that Messrs. King 
and Rowney’s paper will have done a great deal to extend our 
knowledge of the structure of the fossil, and to permanently en- 
hance their own reputation. 
In a paper “On the Kainozoic Formations of Belgium,” 
Mr. Godwin-Austen disputes the truth of the distinction which 
has been drawn between the subdivisions of the Belgian crag, and 
propounds the view that although they may have been produced 
“ under slightly differmg conditions, and in sequence, yet in the 
horizontal sections they replace one another.” He also endeavours 
to show the inapplicability of percentage calculations as a means of 
determining the relative ages of these deposits, on the ground that 
while the fossils of the lower, or Diestien, beds, are proper to them, 
those of the upper, or Scaldisien, beds, are wholly extraneous, 
belonging to all regions of depth and all periods of the crag- 
formation. The conclusion is therefore inevitable that although 
the Diestien fossils may enable us to infer the condition of that 
part of the crag sea at a particular time, the Scaldisien fossils are 
no guide whatever in geological chronology. Mr. Godwin-Austen 
