Mr. Farey’s Reply to Mr. Bakewell. 59 
Smith’s meritorious labours on this important subject, since 
“Mr. John Cary of the Strand has the publication now in- 
band, and the greater part of a Map of England, Wales, 
part of Scotland, France, and Treland (for the sake of shew- 
ing the connections of strata) 1s already engraved, ona scale 
of 5 miles to an inch, for Mr. Smith’s ‘intended publication., 
Mr. B. will I conceive find it difficult to shew, that I 
have asserted that the metalliferous limestone (in the sin- 
gular) in Derbyshire is the very lowest stratum of Rocks in 
England: for although to suit the purposes of the transi+ 
tion part of his new Theory, Mr. B. chuses always to speak 
of the four regular calcareous Rocks, which Mr. Whitehurst 
and myself have described in the Peak Hundreds, as one 
Rock, yet this won’t prevent our seeing, that should the top 
of the first or upper of these Rocks “be proved to appear, 
from under Shale- grit and Millstone-grit near Burnsal (as I 
rather believe it does), yet that the top of the second, the third 
and the fourth of these Rocks in succession, bbe more so 
the Lottom of the last or lowest of them, 1 in short the whole 
Series appearing in Craven or near it, may still safely be 
doubted, since no new light is thrown, or confirmation 
offered in Mr. B’s recent work, of such his opinion ; it is 
true ‘he has ‘ repeated the assertion again,” at pages 274, 
279 and 281. 
After having seen the different ranges of Limestone be- 
tween Lancaster and Kendal, overlieing a Slate, which Mr. 
B. has admitted ‘to be the same Slate with that of Craven; 
I have now better reasons than when I first wrote, oe 
agreeing with Mr. Mushet (vol. xl, p. 53) in thinking these 
to be very different Rocks from any in the north of Derby- 
shire; and to me they seemed, well to answer to the Rocks 
I had observed W and NW of Ludlow (as already mene 
tioned herein) and had more recently crossed when again 
leaving the sfate,near to Welsh-pool,in my return from Wales. 
Mr. B’s assertion, that I had nothing to advance in sup- 
port of my opinion, as to the Peak and the Craven Lime- 
Stones, but the existence of my ‘* imaginary great Fault,’’ 
and his gbestion in the next page, as to . haw the Limestone 
has passed ‘¢ over or under” the Fault, too well proves, that 
this Gentleman is but slightly acquainted, or rather not at 
all, with my investigations, on the principles of Faudis: but 
as this is a subject on which J must further enlarge, | shall 
introduce the same in a future Letter, and remain 
Your obedient servant, 
Upper Crown-strect, Westminster, Joun Farey Sen. 
re 16th July, 1813, 
XI. Case 
