of the Red Limestone of Hunstanton. 235 



Now it is to be remarked that our Cambridge Gault is almost 

 unfossiliferous, and that the fossils in those days referred to the 

 Gault were in all probability such as are now acknowledged to 

 belong to the Upper Greensand. Therefore the Professor (as 

 interpreted by our present information) will be understood to 

 regard the red beds of Hunstanton as an unusual form of the 

 Upper Greensand. Hence I believe it was intended that the 

 Speeton beds were to be referred to the chalk-marl, and those of 

 Hunstanton to the beds immediately below it, — indicating, per- 

 haps, a sequence of deposition. How far these remarks are 

 supported by facts will presently be seen. 



Three years later. Prof. Phillips published the first list of 

 fossils from the red bed at Speeton — a short one, enumerating 

 Terebratula semiglohosa, Inoceramus Cuvieri^, and Belemnites 

 Listeri. 



These are decidedly of the Chalk type ; and on the evidence 

 of them the Professor, in his second edition, seven years after- 

 wards, arranges the bed with the lower part of the Chalk. 



In the following year (1830) appeared Mr. Samuel Wood- 

 ward's ' Geology of Norfolk.' Mr. Woodward may be considered 

 the last author who, from original observation, advocated the 

 idea of stratigraphical relation first set forth by William Smith ; 

 and though he had a good list of fossils, it is somewhat remark- 

 able that this is done on stratilogical evidence. Thus, he observes, 

 *'The bed is interspersed with numerous small quartz-pebbles 

 of a dark-green colour, identifying it with the ' chalk with sili- 

 cious grains.' " This is certainly a character which remarkably 

 attracts the observer, but it must only be valued at what it is 

 worth. In the abstract, mineral character alone will in general 

 be found useless, and it is only when the fossils coincide with 

 the indications which mineral character affords that a valuable 

 deduction may be drawn. 



On comparing his fossils, we must strike out from the list 

 Terebratula intermedia, which was wrongly identified, and T. iri- 

 plicata, which Mr. Rose tells me is a fragment of Inoceramus 

 sulcatus, and also alter Spatangus planus to Cardiaster suborbicu- 

 laris and Apiocj'inites ellipticus to A. rugosus; then, taking the 

 known ranges, six will be common to the Lower Chalk, seven to 

 the Upper Greensand, and five to the Gault. Two species are 

 otherwise peculiar to the Chalk, two to the Upper Greensand, 

 and two to the Gault. This is certainly not the fauna of the 

 Chardstock Chalk ; and with that therefore the Red Limestone 

 cannot be identified. 



Five years later, the deposit was described by Mr. C. B. Rose 



* This appears to be the I. leBviuscuius (Bean). 



16* 



