Reports and Proceedings. 43 
The geological formations occurring in these regions were stated 
to be (1) a fluvio-lacustrine series, (2) a Siwalik series, (3) Nummu- 
litic Limestone, (4) Jurassic rocks, and (5) a Paleozoic series. In 
reference to the fluvio-lacustrine strata, the author gave a résumé of 
the conclusions respecting their physical features and mode of for- 
mation at which he had arrived in a former paper,* and in addition 
gave some details respecting their position and stratigraphical cha- 
racters, especially describing the mode of occurrence in them of 
some land and freshwater Shells, which were referred to in a Note 
by Mr. 8. P. Woodward, as being all recent British species. The 
lakes in which the lacustrine deposits were formed were supposed 
by Capt. Godwin-Austen to have been produced in consequence of 
the mouths of valleys, into which rivers run, becoming blocked up 
by means of glaciers and otherwise, as now often happens in the 
same region. Stratigraphical details of the other series of rocks 
were then given, the Jurassic formation being supposed to belong 
to the Middle Division of the Oolites, and the Paleozoic limestone 
being described as Carboniferous Limestone, both of which determi- 
nations were confirmed by Messrs. Etheridge and Davidson in Notes 
on the Fossils, in which their striking resemblance to those of the 
same age in Britain was shown. Theage of the clay-slate and mica- 
slate was stated to be very doubtful; and the author concluded by 
describing the localities in which granite rocks occur, but chiefly as 
forming the axis of the North-western Himalayas. 
2. ‘On the Cetacean Fossils termed Ziphius by Cuvier, with a 
notice of a new species (Belemnoziphius compressus) from the Red 
Crag.’ By Prof. T. H. Huxley, F.R.S., F.G.S. 
The genus Ziphius, as originally constituted by Cuvier, contained 
three species described by him, namely, Z. cavirostris, Z. plani- 
rostris, and Z. longirostris; but it is probable that each of these 
really belongs to a distinct genus—the first to Zzphius, the second 
to Choneziphius, and the last to the author’s genus Belemnoziphius. 
More recently M. Gervais has established a new species—Ziphius 
Becanii—from a specimen formerly considered to belong to Z. lon- 
girostris ; and this species, with that described in this paper, and 
Professor Owen’s MS. species in the British Museum, were also 
considered referable to Belemnoziphius. 
Besides the foregoing conclusions respecting the affinities of the 
fossil Rhynchoceti, Professor Huxley discussed the relations of the 
recent genera and species of the same group, including the Ceta- 
cean of Aresquiers, which was considered by Gervais to belong 
to the genus Ziphius. He exhibited these relations in a tabular 
form, and concluded by stating that he had arrived at the following 
results :— 
~ 1. Unless the Cetacean of Aresquiers be identical with Ziphius 
cavirostris, all the Ziphit of Cuvier belong to Cetacea generally 
distinct from those now living. 
2. If the Cetacean of Aresquiers be identical with Ziphius cavi- 
* Quart. Journ. Geol. Soe., vol. xv. p. 221. 
