276 Reviews—The Geological Survey of England and Wales. 
Bavent, and Covehithe furnish sections of the Upper Crag (including 
the Chillesford Beds) ; these strata are overlaid by a ‘‘ Pebbly Series,” 
and the question of their precise equivalents in other parts of 
the country is a debatable one; while above all there are accumula- 
tions of Glacial Drift. A well-boring at Southwold, made in 1886- 
1887, has thrown much light on the underground geology, for it has 
proved the position of the Chalk at a depth of 3238 feet; this is 
overlain by 70 feet of Reading Beds, 68 feet of London Clay, 147 
feet of Crag, and 87 feet of the Pebbly Series. 
The thickness of the Crag, as remarked by Mr. Whitaker, is the 
greatest yet recorded in England, and shows, together with the 
information obtained through wells at Leiston, Saxmundham, and 
Beccles, that the formation has a more important development than 
was suspected a few years ago. Whether this great thickness of 
Crag should be classed with the Norwich or Red Crag matters little, 
for, as Mr. Whitaker remarks, they are one formation, and “no useful 
purpose would be served by troubling about such a question.” There 
is, however, no evidence to show that the highest stage of the Norwich 
Crag series (such as that represented in the fossiliferous beds of 
Weybourn and the Bure. Valley) is here present, unless it be repre- 
sented in portions of the ‘‘ Pebbly Series” that are fossiliferous near 
Southwold. 
The “ Pebbly Series,” however, presents many difficulties. Much 
of what is now grouped under this name was originally regarded as 
Middle Glacial by Messrs. S. V. Wood and Harmer in their Map and 
Sections of the Crag District, and although Mr. Wood subsequently 
modified his views, there does not appear to be any definite evidence 
for the change, and an examination of the Survey Map is not calcu- 
lated to dispel the notion. These difficulties in correlation are 
apparent to any one studying the Newer Pliocene and Glacial Deposits 
of Hast Anglia, and they are very fully and fairly stated by Mr. 
Whitaker. He is disposed to regard the Pebbly Series as belonging 
to one division, and he leaves it an open question whether it should 
be regarded as Glacial or Pliocene. he shells found in the beds at 
Southwold are all species known to occur in the Crag; but neither 
there nor at Dunwich is the Crag separated from the Pebbly Series 
by the Chillesford Beds which are present in many localities. 
On the other hand, where the mass of the Pebbly Series rests on 
the Chillesford Beds, as seen in the Cliff-sections of Easton Bavent 
and Covehithe, there is a marked line of erosion between them ; 
while in a section at Henham Park Wood (drawn by the late Mr. 8. 
V. Wood, jun.), the Pebbly Beds are shown to rest on the Chilles- 
ford Clay, and tongues of the latter which penetrate the overlying 
beds are said to have been “lifted up.” In reference to this Mr. 
Whitaker remarks that “The lifting up of masses of this clay and 
the forcing under them of wedges of the pebbly beds is an oceur- 
rence of great interest,” and ‘seems to point also to some lapse of 
time between the two deposits.” We feel, however, some hesitation 
in adopting the explanation, which is suggestive of Glacial action, 
for there is no Boulder-clay present. 
