On the Vhysiology of Vegetables. 125 



hns mentioned, referable to two very different parts of the series ? 

 (separated by the Basaltic stratum", the subject of the last head 

 of Queries) : viz, 1st, those of Holy-Island (N shore ?) and of 

 Hairshaw, to the Craw-coal and Limestone series below the Ba- 

 salt ? ; and, 2nd, those of Low-lights Rock at the Tyne mouth, of 

 Merton (not Muston?), of Hebburn, of Heaton-dean, and of 

 Wylam, to the thick Coal series (or some one stratum therein ?) 

 far above the Basalt ? 



4th. Does it anywhere appear on the surface, or has it been 

 anywhere proved by sinking or boreing, that the Red Marl or its 

 Sandstone, of the lower part of the vale of the Tees, is actually 

 " covered by the alum shale" of the north-east part of York- 

 shire ? : and if so, at how many and what places ?. 



5th. Where are the ash-gray fragments of shelly bituminous 

 Shale (P. M. xlvi. p. 406) most copiously washed on the shore, 

 of the Lincolnshire Coast ? The shelly bituminous Shale near 

 Bolingbroke, certainly is not skimted immediateh/ below the 

 hard chalk, as Mr. W. seems (P. M. xlvii. p. lOIj to suppose: 

 but from the Querist's observations, he is inclined to think, that 

 the same may almost as deeply underlie the chalk of Walton, 

 NNW of Wainfleet, as the Coals of Easingvvold do the Chalk of 

 Acklam, or Bishop-Wilton, N of Pocklington ; or as deeply as 

 the Coals of Danby Dale, E of Whitby, underlie the Chalk of 

 Hunmanby, &:c. 



He believes, that neither the Amonites or other Shells f of the 

 Danby Dale or Tliirsk or Easingwold Coal series, will be found 

 waiiting in the Chmch Clay, in any part of the range which Mr. 

 Smith has traced for it, on his IVL-ip of the strata of Encjland. 



Trusting to the kindness and liberality of Mr.Winch and others 

 for resolving those Queries, with as much expedition as is con- 

 sistent with circumstances, I remain 



Jan. 7, 1817. A CONSTANT ReaDER. 



XXX. On the Physiology of Vegetables. By Mrs. Agnes 



lliBKTSON. 



To Mr. Tilloch. 



Sir, — i NOW write to show that I am not the original author 

 of the discoveries made and presented in my last letter; for I find, 

 with the greatest joy, that it has been previously published and 

 acknowledged by one of the cleverest men, and the most scien- 

 tific observer, of the last century. Mr. Henry Baker is the per- 

 son to whom I allude. Unfortunately he didnot (I suppose for 



\\ant 



