xliv 



INTRODUCTION. 



ferences are made to ({ microscopical and palseontological evi- 

 dences/' which " completely vindicate the theory of aqueous 

 deposition of serpentine as maintained by Dr. T. Sterry Hunt"! 

 " The announcement by Prof. Karl Mobius of a recent sessile 

 Foraminifer from the Mauritius, not very remote from Eozoon 

 in its general mode of growth/' is declared " to be an important 



contribution towards the history of the oldest fossil/' 



* 



1876. On the Serpentine and Associated Rocks of the Lizard District. 



Rev. T. G. Bonney. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxxiii. 



pp. 884-924. 



During the discussion which followed the reading of this 

 memoir, and in answer to a question put by the President, the 

 writer replied that " for his own part he believed in the organic 

 nature of Eozoon." How this reply is to be reconciled with the 

 following statement Prof. Bonney has lately made <( I have 

 never myself seen a serpentine which was not intrusive" (Geol. 

 Mag., Feb. 1881, p. 94) is a puzzle to us, as it must be to 

 eozoonists, considering that their doctrine is based on the 

 sedimentary or ' ' aqueous deposition " of " eozoonal " serpentines 

 (see last citation) . But is not eozoonism full of inconsistencies ? 



1876. Otto Hahn. Wiirttembergische naturwissensch. Jahreshefte, 

 Jahrgang 1878. 



1876. Supplement to the Second Edition of ' Acadian Geology/ Dr. 



J. W. Dawson. 



Notices the occurrence of " somewhat obscure structures, 

 which appear to indicate the presence of fragments of Eozoon" 

 in one of the Upper Limestones, considered to be Upper Lau- 

 rentian, near St. John's, New Brunswick. 



1876. Dr. T. Sterry Hunt, addressing a meeting of the Natural- 

 History Society of Montreal, after his return from Europe, 

 announced the cheering news that " the animal structure of 

 Eozoon was now pretty generally admitted by European 

 scientists" (Canadian Naturalist, vol. ix. p. 58). 



