524 Correspondence — Dr. E. W. ClaypoJe — Mr. B. Hohson. 



A BED OF PEAT IN LONDON CLAY? 



Sir, — I observe in the July Number of the "Journal of the 

 Society of Industrial Chemisti'y " a notice of a short paper in which 

 the use of the term "London Clay" is erroneous, or at least appears 

 so to me. The writers mention and describe a bed of peat at the 

 works of the New Thames Tunnel " underlying the Loudon Clay." 

 As the bed in question is only 12 feet iDelow the surface this is 

 scarcely possible unless there is some misprint. The peat is " com- 

 posed chiefly of branches and trunks of trees, twigs, etc. It is 

 about two feet thick." 



It seems to me that the writers are referring to one of the ex- 

 posures of the buried forest or peat bed so common around the 

 southern coast of England. The error, if such it is, would be of 

 slight importance were it not for the concluding sentence, " it has 

 geological interest as showing that at a period anterior to the forma- 

 tion of the London Clay an abundant growth of trees and shrubs 

 extended from some distance inland right down to the water's edge 

 in this locality." 



It seems from this that the writers have also mistaken some recent 

 and local stratum for the " London Clay " of geology. Perhaps 

 some one nearer to the spot than I am can correct the error if there 

 is one. E. W. Claypole, D.Sc, B.A. (Lond.) 



BucHTEL Coll., Akron, Ohio. 



Note by Mr. F. C. J. Spurrell, F.G.S. 



Sir, — I have read Mr. Claypole's letter. His surmise that the bed 

 of peat 12 feet below the surface at the spot described is part of the 

 recent forest-beds of the South of England is correct. It is above 

 and in no way connected with the London Clay. This term, applied 

 to the alluvial blue clays of the Thames, was in use in Brunei's days, 

 and I should think the author of the paper referred to had been 

 reading up some old accounts of embanking, etc., of the last centuiy, 

 when the blue clay, wherever found, was supposed to be the same as 

 the mass underlying London. E. C. J. S. 



Belvedere, Kent, 2ith Sept., 1892, 



THE PHOSPHATIC CHALK AT TAPLOW. 



Sir, — Since, so far as I am aware, none but microscopic fish 

 remains have been recorded from the Taplow phosphatic chalk, it 

 may be of interest to mention that, on July 8th last, 1 found in the 

 8 ft. bed at Taplow Court Lodge, described by Mr. Strahan (Quart. 

 Journ. Geol. Soc, 1891, p. 356), the detached crown of a shark's 

 tooth finch long. Although this is insufficient for accurate deter- 

 mination, Mr, A. Smith Woodward informs me that it most nearly 

 resembles the form of tooth described by Agassiz as Odontaspis 

 subulata, but is rather large for that species. 



Bernard Hobson. 



Geological Department, Owen's College, Manchester. 

 September loth, 1892. 



