288 Correspondence—Dr. F. H. Hatch—Dr. Henry Hicks. 
CORRESPONDENCE. 3 
OCCURRENCE OF SODA-FELSITES (KERATOPHYRES) IN IRELAND. 
Sir,—In the February Number of this Macazinz I gave some 
account of the occurrence of soda-felsites or keratophyres in Co. 
Wicklow, at the conclusion of which I expressed the opinion that 
they would also be found to occur among the felsites that crop out 
in such abundance on the Waterford coast between Tramore and 
Ballyvoyle Head. Since the publication of this paper my attention 
has been drawn to some analyses of the Waterford felsites which 
were made by the late Mr. John Arthur Phillips and published in 
the Philosophical Magazine for January, 1870 (vol. xxxix. p. 12). 
As these analyses do not appear to be generally known,’ and as they 
are interesting as confirming my surmise as to the probable occur- 
rence of soda-felsites among the Lower Paleozoic rocks of Co. 
Waterford, I venture to bring them to the notice of the readers of 
the GroLocicaL MaGazinz. 
No. 1 was collected at the sea-cliff east of the village of Knock- 
mahon. It is described as an eivanite. It is a compact rock “of 
bluish grey colour, which, when freshly broken, shows imbedded 
crystals of quartz and felspar in an amorphous matrix.” The 
felspar is supposed by the author to be oligoclase. 
No. 2 is a ‘flesh-coloured felsite obtained from a very broad 
band of this rock seen in the cliff near the village of Annstown, 
and immediately west of a copper-vein in which some explorations 
are being made. Under the microscope this was found to consist of 
a colourless and generally amorphous matrix enclosing a few crystals 
of dodecahedral quartz and some small crystals of felspar.” 
i hele I. ia 
Sm} Gsuooadoe (288 80°50 INGO) cooooe 5°83 2°12 
INGOs acoave 9:02 8°33 1aO)- opocac 1°83 1°38 
Fe.03 ...... 6°34 3°44 —-— 
HEOMeassusste 1:06 96 99°79 $9°83 
CAOM eroreces 1:92 1:21 ——— ees 
WEA) das trace as trace SpaGaeees 2°66 es 2°64 
ON) ee: 1:46 1°89 wa 
28, JERMYN STREET. Freperick H. Harcu. 
STENOTHECA, SALTER. 
Srr,—In the note by Mr. G. F. Matthew, in the Gxon. Mac. for 
May, on Stenotheca (p. 210), it is assumed that the name was sug- 
gested first by me. ‘This is not correct, as the MS. name was given 
by Mr. Salter, and afterwards adopted by me in my paper “On some 
undescribed Fossils from the Menevian Group” (Q.J.G.S. vol. xxviii. 
p- 180). The species is there given as “Stenotheca cornucopia, Salter.” 
May 3, 1889. Henry Hicks. 
Erratum.—In the April Number, p. 172, line 22 should read: 
“or it may be co-ossified with the lachrymal, as in Sphenodon, 
which bone is not free, as stated by Dr. Gunther.” 
New Haven, Conn,, U.S. Dr. G. Baur. 
1 They are not mentioned, for instance, in Teall’s British Petrography. 
