Correspondence— G. W. Lamplugh. 95 



COBBESPOITDE1TCE. 



HIGH-LEVEL SHELLY DELFT. 



Sik,— Mr. Crook (Geol. Mag., January, 1911) is wrong in supposing 

 that the upholders of the land-ice hypothesis for the origin of our 

 high-level shelly drifts are satisfied by the rendering of their views as 

 usually stated by the opponents of the hypothesis, and he credits 

 them undeservedly with docility in the matter. As only one of the 

 upholders in question I venture to refer Mr. Crook to a letter of mine 

 in Nature for May 6, 1897 (vol. lvi, p. 10), which displays a really 

 deplorable lack of docility. Since that was written I have repeatedly 

 set forth the full argument, in a more subdued tone, in applying the 

 hypothesis to specific instances — e.g., in memoirs on the Isle of Man 

 on the Dublin district, on the Belfast district, and in an address to 

 Section C of the British Association, York, 1906 — referring in the 

 last, among other instances, to observations in North Greenland even 

 more illustrative than that to which Mr. Crook draws attention. 

 Finally, last summer, in Spitzbergen, I saw for myself some remarkable 

 examples of the entanglement and uplift of marine detritus by glaciers 

 and its incorporation with the morainic products of land-ice. 



It has been persistently explained that our high-level shelly drifts 

 are believed to represent, not a bodily transportation of their material 

 en masse, but an uplifting and scattering of the marine detritus piece- 

 meal by the advancing ice-sheets. Statement of the case has of late 

 grown wearisome even to its upholders by unavailing reiteration, 

 and the misapprehension which has impressed Mr. Crook will no doubt 

 continue to reveal itself from time to time as blandly as ever. 



G. "W. Lamplugh. 

 St. Albans. 



January 7, 1911. 



MISNAMED LOCALITIES AND THE UINTACRINUS CHALK 

 AT KESTON. 



Sir, — In September last you kindly published a letter from me 

 respecting the discovery of the Marsupite zone at Farnborough in 

 Kent. By some accident this appeared as llarswpites in Surrey, 

 which zone had been worked by Mr. George Young, F.G.S., and 

 described by him in the Proceedings of the Geologists' Association. 

 I did not see the letter for a long time after its publication, or 

 should have written at once to correct the error. 



In October last, while examining the chalk by the roadside 

 immediately opposite Keston Church, where about 18 inches of it 

 are revealed above the footpath, I discovered ample proof of the 

 presence of the TJintacrinus-zone, which I had previously discovered 

 at Orpington, Fox Hill, and West Wickham. The great point of 

 interest attached to this is that the fauna revealed in the Leave's 

 Green Pit a few yards south of Keston Church is that of the 



