48 Correspondence — T. C. Gantrill — /. Reid Moir. 



Although well aware of the iateresting paper on the Old lladnor 

 district by Professor Garwood and Miss Goodyear, I refrained from 

 alluding to it, because it bears on a different locality, and (to judge 

 by the abstract) deals more particularly with an abnormal facies of 

 the Woolhope Limestone — a matter with which I was not concerned. 

 My reason for quoting the earlier authorities was to show how com- 

 pletely the so-called practical men who promoted the scheme had 

 ignored what was already known about their own neighbourhood. 



T. C. Gantrill. 



28 Jekmyn Street, S.W. 1. 

 December 13, 1917. 



THE KYSON MONKEY. 



Sir, — In an important paper published recently by Professor 

 Boswell in the Journal of the Ipswich and District Field Club (" The 

 Geology of the Woodbridge District, Suffolk "), vol. v, pt. i, pp. 1-12, 

 it is stated (p. 1) in reference to the Eocene sand of Kyson, near 

 Woodbridge, that " Prestwich found the remains of a monkey 

 (Macacus eocmnus) in this bed ". This, however, is incorrect. In 

 Owen's British Fossil Mammals and Birds (1846), on p. 3, he wrote : 

 " The fossils manifesting quadrumanous characters were discovered, 

 in 1839, by Mr. Williani Colchester ... in the parish of Kingston 

 — commonly called Kyson — in Suffolk." 



A further reference is made to this discovery in the Memoirs of 

 the Geological Survey {The Geology of the Country around Ipswich, 

 Radleigh, and Felixstowe). On p. 26, in describing the Kyson beds, 

 it is stated: "... the section was exposed in 1839 at the brick- 

 yard at Kingston or Kyson " ; then follow details of the section and 

 a list of the Eocene mammals found. Amongst these is mentioned 

 "■ Hyracotherium cuniculus, Owen (first called Macacus eocatms)". 

 Lower down on p. 26 it is stated " The complete section is given by 

 Prof. Prestwich, from whose paper the above details are given". 

 Finall)^ on p. 143, appears the following: " 145. Owen, (Sir) R. 

 'On the JTyracotheriaii character of the Lower Molars of the supposed 

 Macacus from the Eocene Sand of Kyson, Suffolk '' : Ann, I^at. Hist., 

 ser. 3, vol. x, p. 240." 



It thus seems clear (1) that the so-called Macacus remains "were 

 not found by Prestwich, but by Mr. Colchester ; (2) that further 

 examination of these remains established the fact that they were not 

 referable to Macacus at all, but to Syracotherium cuniculus ; and 

 (3) that Professor Prestwich made the foregoing facts clear in 

 a paper published by him in 1850 (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, vol. vi, 

 pp. 272, 273). 



As there are apparently some investigators who still believe that 

 quadrumanous remains have been found in the Eocene of Suffolk, 

 I venture to bring this matter before geologists so that the error may 

 be eliminated. 



J. Reid Moir. 



November 26, 1917. . , 



