266 Scientific Intelligence. 
~ to agree in lithological character with much older secondary rocks. 
a . 
ai ae Several of the most animated discussions which have taken place in 
oe this room since 1825, have turned, as you will recollect, on this subject, 
especially when the fossil shells brought by Mr. Pratt from Biaritz In 
the Pyrenees were laid upon our table. A decided opinion was then 
expressed. by many of us that the nummulitic series of that southern 
made clear that the proportion of fossil species common to the Biaritz 
“<~ beds and. the chalk was extremely small—much too small to imply a 
cretaceous age for the strata in question, or even a zoological passage 
from the cretaceous to the tertiary formations. They who have read 
whole series, were identical with fossils of the lower eocene of the 
Paris basin, while the rest were all tertiary forms -except four, which 
” belonged to species of the chalk.t Ina papenby M. Deshayes, read 
“ to. the Geological Society of France in June, 1844,i that able concholo- 
3 ‘declared, after examining the Biaritz fossils, “ that the whole of t 
* 
y 
“At appears from the researches of MM. Desmoulins:.and Raulin, that 
_. some few of the characteristic fossils of Maestricht have really been 
~ efound in that chain; but you will, I think, agree with M. Deshayes; wr? 
not enough to establish the existence of any true equivalent of 
stricht geoup—that distinct and uppermost division of the chalk 
coralline limes 
aris, are referable.. a 
eet a eee ee ee 
tone in Seeland, as. well as the pisos: . 
’ 
. 
2 
j 
eels eo) Se 
