The Chalk and jts Dislocations. 269: 
adjacent sea-bottom, and that on the other hand in dealing with the 
question of the origin of the local beds so much reliance should 
have been placed upon the foreign stones in the shingles on the 
shore instead of those in the deposits inland, for 1 am more than ever 
convinced that a great proportion of the foreigners in the shingles, 
especially the so-called Scandinavian boulders, are derived from ballast, 
either from wrecks or discarded from ships, and are entirely misleading 
in their testimony. ' 
In regard to the theories which abound in the memoirs of the 
Geological Survey dealing with North Norfolk, and which have 
proved a snare to many credulous people, I hold that they are for 
the most part quite out of place there. Theories, especially highly 
polemical theories, ought to find a place in the private publications 
of the Geological surveyors and not in Government publications where 
we want facts. We can draw our own inferences. 
Can anything, in fact, be more disconcerting than to find the 
President of the Geological Section at last year’s meeting of the British 
Association (himself a prominent member of the staff of the Geological 
Survey) completely discarding the theory of interglacial periods which 
forms the keynote of the explanations of the Norfolk drifts in the 
memos of his own colleagues, Mr. Horace Woodward and 
Mr. Clement Reid, and which is adduced quite confidently as 
well-established in their descriptions of these beds. It is perfectly 
plain that if Mr. Lamplugh’s address contains sound reasoning on 
this subject the theoretical explanation of the surface geology of 
East Anglia contained in the Survey Memoirs ought to be revised 
as soon as possible, for these theoretical conclusions are no longer 
tenable. 
That Mr. Lamplugh is right in his views about interglacial beds 
I have no doubt. ‘The only complaimt I have to make is that it 
should be so belated. The conclusions which he now publishes as 
if he was the first to generalize in their sense have been pressed 
for thirty years in many papers and two big works by one Howorth. 
None of these publications are noticed in his address, which contains, 
by the way, a good many references to obscure foreign memoirs on the 
subject, which took me much time to find, and which appear in it as 
if they had not been previously discovered by other people. It is 
more to the point, however, that Mr. Lamplugh should have been 
constrained by the force of the evidence to discard his colleagues’ 
views on interglacial beds so completely, and notably those of 
Mr. James Geikie, the author of the Glacialists’ Bible. 
Let us, however, proceed. I have said that until the boring rod 
has been used in many parts of Norfolk and Suffolk we shall never 
know what the true history of the later geological changes in these 
counties has been. The only part of the work for which adequate 
material is in fact available, until a great deal of such experzmental 
digging has been done, is the mapping of the coast sections, which do 
afford exceptionally rich materials where the evidence is not hidden or 
distorted by the occurrence of long stretches of fallen débris forming 
a sloping talus. This talus, however, on a coast where the sea is very 
active is periodically cleared away, and fresh clean surfaces are therefore 
