4^4 J. E. Ifarr — On the Coniston Limestone. 



country partially resembles " a gigantic fault-breccia." Doubtless 

 we have made mistakes, and shall willingly acknowledge them, 

 when proved by ourselves or others, but proof is certainly required, 

 and for my own part I must demur to Mr. Goodchild's "corrections" 

 when they are only matters of personal opinion. When he publishes 

 his evidence, if it is convincing, I will accept the "corrections," but 

 until then I prefer our own conclusions, arrived at after consider- 

 able study of included fossils, as well as of the rocks themselves. 



Mr. Goodchild chiefly comments upon our interpretation of the 

 rocks of the Cross Fell Inlier, and adds some remarks upon my 

 notes of the Craven area. It will be convenient to consider his 

 comments upon each of these areas in turn. 



The Bala rocks of the Gross Fell Inlier. — Mr. Goodchild states that 

 for "field purposes "it is sufficient to divide these rocks into a lower 

 shaley and an upper mainly calcareous series, and that " any local 

 change from argillaceous to calcareous is, as might be expected, 

 accompanied by a corresponding change in the fossils." If this be 

 so, the fossil lists in our paper on " The Cross Fell Inlier " must be 

 entirely incorrect, and our work practically worthless. Our piincipal 

 aim was to show that the Coniston Limestone Series was divisible 

 into three main groups, which I have referred to in my paper in the 

 March Number of the Geological Magazine as the Roman Fell, 

 the Sleddale, and the Ashgill groups. Each of these groups con- 

 tains both calcareous and argillaceous members, yet the fauna of 

 ear-h group differs markedly from that of the other two, whilst the 

 calcareous and argillaceous members of each have usually many 

 fossils in common ; this will be seen by examination of our fossil 

 lists, and I appeal to them as evidence. Not only are the fossils 

 of the various groups difl'erent (whatever may be the lithologieal 

 characters of the component beds of each), but we have shown that 

 the faunas follow one another in an order corresponding with that 

 observable in the equivalent beds at home and abroad. Previous 

 experience warrants one in accepting such order in a complex 

 district, rather than a division sufficient for " field purposes," in 

 support of which no paleeontological evidence is advanced. I may 

 notice that in Swindale, which shows the most complete section of 

 the Bala rocks in the Cross Fell Inlier, the actual order of succession 

 is that which we have inferred from the fossil contents of the strata. 



Mr. Goodchild believes that the Keisley limestone belongs to a 

 higher part of his mainly " calcareous series than has been left by 

 pre-Silurian denudation elsewhere in the area under notice." From 

 this remark and the insertion in his table on p. 298 of an uncon- 

 formity between the Silurian rocks and the Coniston Limestone 

 Series, it would appear that he considers that there was denudation 

 of the Coniston Limestone beds before the deposition of the Stockdale 

 Shales. Will he give his evidence for this? He states that the 

 Keisley Limestone is " faulted in all round," so that there can 

 hardly be evidence at Keisley itself. The only localities we have 

 seen in the Cross Fell area where the Skelgill Beds are shown, viz. 

 Eundale Beck, the slopes of Dultou Pike, and the Alston Moor road, 



