764 SIR HEXRY H. HOWORTH OX THE [Nov. 9, 



Memoir on Sheet 86, and pp. 177-183, where the moUusca in 

 several pits ai'e described, appai'ently in all cases very fragmentaiy 

 and much broken, and in no case in situ. 



The drift beds of East Yorkshire tell the same story. 

 Mr. Lamplugh has conclusively shown that none of the shells 

 in the shell-bed at Bridlington nor those found at Dimlington 

 near Spurn Point had been obtained from beds " in place," but 

 from " masses of sand and clay occurring as boulders in the base- 

 ment boulder-clay." That is, that the shells were transported. 

 Dr. G. Jeffreys at the reading of the paper said he believed 

 from personal inspection that this was a remanie deposit 

 (Q. J. Geol. Soc. xl. p. 326). In his ' Geology of Holderness ' 

 Mr. Clement Reid fully admitted the fragmentary and transported 

 character of the shell-beds, and Mr. Lamplugh again remarks on 

 the inclusion in the so-called basement clay of stratified patches 

 of transported sand containing shells. It is clear, therefoi'e, that 

 the MoUusca in the Yorkshire drifts, like those in the East Anglian 

 ones, are derivative and so could only have been derived from the 

 later Crag beds. 



Again, Mr. E. T. Newton has expressed the opinion that the 

 whole of the fish-remains at Bridlington are either Norwich Crag, 

 Ked Crag, or London Clay ; and seeing that so many of the Ci'ag 

 Vertebrata have been originally derived from the London Clay, it 

 is quite possible that all the Bridlington fishes have been derived 

 directly from the Crags. He adds the very important sentence : 

 "I should doubt if any of them were contemporaneous with the 

 Bridlington deposits, and the mineral condition and polished 

 surface of the specimens are characteristic of Crag fossils. This 

 would seem to point to the destruction of older Tertiary beds 

 during the formation of the gravelly sand containing the Arctic 

 fauna." (Q. J. Geol. Soc. xl. p. 322.) Mr. C. Lewis says that the 

 character of the shells in the Weybourne Crag accords well with 

 that of the shells at Speeton. 



Travelling further north, we find similar broken and much 

 comminuted shells in the drift beds of Durham and Berwick- 

 shire whose condition similarly proves their derivative character. 

 Further north again we find that in the drift beds of Eastern 

 Scotland the shells are precisely in the same condition, comminuted, 

 striated and smoothed, and very seldom whole. Professor Geikie 

 describes them as scattered confusedly through the mass, like the 

 boulders with which they are associated. This is especially the 

 case with the shelly drift covering a large part of Caithness. 

 Moreover, Peach arid Horzie found numbers of smoothed and 

 striated shell-fragments in the Orkneys. This all points unmis- 

 takably to the shells in question being derivative and not in situ, 

 in the drift beds, and belonging in fact to an earlier horizon. 

 I presume that most people who have seen them as they are found 

 would in fact claim that they are older than the drifts in which 

 they occur, or, to use the language of the glacialists, that they 

 are pre-glacial. According to my view, the mai'ine horizon 



