ISS • Gaolugicul Obstrvations. 



roof or clay-slate, and probably, says he, the bienite of Malvern 

 belongs to this fonnatiou. (Report, p. 152.) It is quite un- 

 necessary for nic to make any comments upon so strange an 

 error as tliat of ])lacing the sienite and slate of Derbyshire and 

 Malvern hills (whicli certainly belong^ to the transition series, but 

 which some have even called primitive,) in the same formation 

 with the gypsum of the red grov.nd, between wliich and the 

 sicaite, in point of regular succession, tliere intervene the red 

 sandstone, mouiitain limestone, and coal deposit with all its ac- 

 companving measures. — As well,! apprcheiid, might Mr. Farey, 

 upon seeing a mountain of granite rising oOOO feet above the 

 surface of sand or gravel which surrounds its \y.\^Q, call the gra- 

 nite a bed in such matters, as the sienite a bed cr product of the 

 red ground. But Mr. Farey, in fact, seems to despise every thing 

 like a systematic arrangement, and calls, forsooth, the confusion 

 which he wishes to introduce, English Geology. 



Mr. Townscnd in his work upon Moses vi-.idicated for vcra- 

 citv, &c. has committed a mistalce not less important. At p. 1 56, 

 hs describes the ipuulz sandstone of Brandon hill near I5risto], 

 which, as I have stated in my former paper, always lies in a con- 

 formable position on the mountain limestone, as a bed in the 

 red ground ; whereas the least observation might h.ave convinced 

 him that the true beds of the red ground have a position quite 

 unconformable to this quartzy sandstone, and that between it 

 and the former there intervenes, as to the icra of their formations, 

 the "whole of the coal deposit. Not less inconsistent is he when 

 he asserts the micaceous sandstone to be a part of the red 

 ground. Upon this belief, it seems strange that he did not 

 follow up his mistake, by saying that every stratimi of coal in 

 the Gloucestershire and Somersetshire basis belonged to the red 

 ground ; for the micaceous sandstone, or Pennant stone, is uni- 

 versally a coal measure ; and in whatever light we consider one, 

 under the same point of view must we regard the other. 



Dr. Kidd in his late piiblication has likewise, I conceive, 

 fallen into a mistake resp>ecting this formation. He there con- 

 founds the red ground with the old red sandstone, and gives it 

 as his opinion, that they both belong to the same formation. 

 Nothing, however, as will ])lainly appear from what i liave abo\e 

 rotated, can be more different than the situation of the beds of 

 the red ground and the red sandstone. No spot is more fa- 

 vourable for observing tiiis differeuee than the neighbourhood of 

 Ness, which the Doctor says he has examined. He would there 

 most distinctly see the old red sandstone dipping under the 

 mountain limestone. — a situation, as every one will acknowledge, 

 perfectly inconsistent with the red ground formation. A similar 

 error, I conceive, has been committed by Mr. Ilorncr in his 



Accouiit 



