Bibliographical Notices. 473 



published, excepting that Sowerby, in the original diagnosis*, 

 mentions that it is testaceous. It is white, glossy, and 

 slightly concave externally, with a groove and a ridge 

 parallel with the outer curved margin, whilst the straight or 

 columellar side is finely serrate. Parallel with the curved 

 outline may be noticed numerous faint subpellucid lines 

 which arise between the denticles on the serrated edge. 



[To be continued.] 



BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES. 



Memoirs of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom. — The 

 Cretaceous Bodes of Britain. Vol. III. The Upper Chalk of 

 England. By A. J. Jukes-Browne. With Contributions by 

 William Hill, F.G.S. 8vo. Pp. x and 560. With 79 Illus- 

 trations in the text and 1 Plate. 1904. E. Stanford, London ; 

 J. Menzies, Edinburgh ; and Hodges & Co., Dublin. Price 10s. 



As in the case of Vol. II. of this work (noticed in the Ann. & Mag. 

 Nat. Hist, for Eebruary 1004), the Board of Agriculture and 

 Eisheries, desirous that agriculturalists and others should have full 

 benefit, has distributed this volume also for review. 



The Memoirs of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom 

 always bring together much valuable material, and this volume is 

 in no way wanting in this respect. The Upper Chalk is defined by 

 the authors as consisting of the zones of Holaster planus, MicrasUr 

 cor-testudinarium, Micraster cor-anguinum, Marsupites, Actinocamax 

 quadratus, Belemnitella mucronata, and Ostrea lunata. The zonal 

 divisions of the Chalk are fully recognized in this volume, although 

 the authors seem reluctant to part with the obsolete divisions of 

 " Upper," " Middle," and " Lower," which have now such small 

 significance. They also seem to hanker after a fresh system of 

 zonal nomenclature (p. 5), but this seems to us to be unnecessary. 

 In tho descriptions of the coast-sections full credit is given to 

 Dr. Howe, who must certainly feel rewarded in reading the generous 

 tribute to his work in the Preface by the Director. Indeed it is 

 quile clear, and is so stated (p. 38), that the publication of Messrs. 

 Howe and 8herborn's work necessitated tho re-writing of those 

 parts of this Memoir which deal with the districts that they have 

 examined ; and this is the more clearly brought out at pp. 275-278 

 (" Yorkshire "), if anyone will take the trouble to compare the 

 official account with that recently published by Dr. Rowe in the 

 ' Proceedings ' of the Geologists' Association. It is more and more 

 evident that future work in the field must be conducted by those 

 who have more than a working knowledge of the zoology of the 

 beds which they are surveying, as the exactitude of results achieved 



* Tankervide Cat. p. xi. 



