78 Dr. Arthur Roice — Uintacri)ins near Dover. 



as this spot is in the neighhoiirhood of a fortress. There is here 

 a section in the Micraster cor-anquinum-zone, with a thin capping of 

 the Uintacrinus-hand. Three brachials of this crinoid, but no body- 

 plates, were found, and out of a list of 15 species we mention 

 Actinocamax verus, the large dome-shaped form of Echinocorys scutatiis, 

 Conulus contcus, Micraster cor-anguinum, Rhynclionella plicaiiUs, Pecten 

 eretosiis, and Pinna decussata. The last-named rare fossil came from 

 the lower zone and is a new record for the district. 



We may mention incidentally that in visiting the estate called 

 Higham, on the high ground to the east of Bridge, we found Uintacrinus 

 abundantly in a little pit in the private grounds. It is clear, therefore, 

 that the stretch of countrj^ lying between Ringwould and Higham 

 would be worth searching for this crinoid wherever the ground stands 

 sufficiently high to make the quest possible. 



Not only are the foregoing observations useful as a record of an 

 ■occurrence of the TIintacrimis-\y^\i(\., hitherto unknown, but they afford 

 some interesting information in relation with the lithological and 

 zoological conditions in that sub-zone. 



In Thanet, with the exception of the ' Bed well-line,' which is 

 a scattered band of smooth nodular flints dividing the Uintacrinus '\ydMd 

 from the IIarsuintes-\>^'a\\., flints are notably rare. In the Uintacrinus- 

 chalk of the Ringwould area, however, flints are nearly always present, 

 .and often of considerable size. Though they are rather irregular in 

 shape, they are generally smooth nodules with practically no cortex, 

 and no tendency to run in courses, thus affording a marked and useful 

 contrast to the notably irregular flints of the zone below, where the 

 flint courses succeed one another at regular intervals and the cortices 

 are quite thick. 



This variation of the flints in the Uititacriniis -hand is but another 

 instance of lithological change in a relatively short distance, for 

 Ringwould is only 10 miles from Pegwell Bay. We have pointed out 

 these local variations in every county with which we have dealt, and 

 are more than ever convinced of the unwisdom of relying on lithological 

 data alone. 



Zoologically, the chief point of interest lies in the fact that the 

 fauna of the two districts is identical. For, as in Thanet, we found 

 Actinocamax verus, the nipple-shajDed head of Bourgueticrinus, the 

 pyramidal shape-variation of Echinocorys scutatus, Terebratulina roiuei, 

 and the large form of Poro^^^hcera glohularis. The shape-variations in 

 Conulus seem also to be the same as those in the Island. We found 

 no fragment of Ammonites leptophyllus, but obtained four examples of 

 Infulaster rostratus, which is a notably rare fossil in Thanet. This 

 echinid must be not uncommon in the Ringwould Chalk, for it is only 

 on these grounds that we can explain the discovery of four minute 

 rostra in sections so poor and obscured by rainwash. 



j^ot one of these sections presented a clean surface, and most of 

 them were very small. In spite of these difficulties we were able to 

 obtain a list of 60 species for the whole area. 



