Correspondence — Rev. John Gunn. 143 



fossils, very few phospliatic nodules, and very little iron oxide. 

 This seems to show that Walton was within the influence of a warm 

 current as to temperature (as shown by its species), but from some 

 local cause escaped its eroding action (as shown by the conditions 

 of deposition), and consequently did not receive the foreign bodies 

 which would have required a swift stream to import. 



0. Fisher. 

 Haklton, Near Cambridge. 



ELEFEAS MEEIDIONALIS IN THE RED CRAG. 

 Sir, — Mr. Lankester, in your last number, inquires " What grounds 

 have the Eev. John Gunn and the Eev. 0. Fisher for stating that the 

 E. meridionalis is found in the Eed Crag ?" I reply that I saw a 

 specimen — an old much water- worn molar — in the collection of Mr. 

 J. H. Eoper, of Lowes toff, Suffolk, merchant. It appeared to have 

 been derived from an older, or basal portion of the Eed Crag ; and, 

 if so, the E. meridionalis is referred back to at least the commence- 

 ment of that crag, which admits, I believe, of several subdivisions. 

 I quite agree with Mr Lankester that there is " no reason for be- 

 lieving that the specimen of E. antiquus mentioned in Palasont. Mon. 

 Yol. II., p. 181, was derived from the Eed Crag. Dr. Falconer says 

 that it came from Southwold, where there is no Eed Crag at all. A 

 ridge of Coralline Crag at Aldburgh appears to separate the Eed 

 from the White Norwich Crag, and there is, as Mr. Prestwich main- 

 tains, no instance of superposition of those two crags. I may safely 

 affirm that no specimens of the Bhinoceros ScMeiermaclieri, or Hi])- 

 parion, have been found in Norfolk. Mr. E. Fitch has, I think, some 

 of the Hycena antiqua (?) The Ursus arvernensis (so named by M. 

 Lartet) abounds in the Forest-bed, and also the Bhinoceros Etruscus. 

 Having noticed the points of reference made to me, I might conclude ; 

 but on looking to the next page, I observe that Mr. Fisher is exposed 

 to a raking fire from ColoneJ Greenwood. As I know that my friend 

 is quite equal to self-defence, I will not further interfere in the fray 

 than to ask how, if the erosion of the valley at Lopham be attributable 

 to either pluvial or fluvial denudation, supposing the water-shed to 

 have been ever on that spot, could the magnificent bed of valley 

 gravel have been deposited on the bank near the ford and the water- 

 shed. I should be glad to be instructed on this point. In a paper, 

 which I read at the British Association at Norwich, I attributed the 

 formation of the water-shed to an upheaval, which may be traced 

 through Norfolk, and which brought the Chalk to the surface at 

 Trimmingham, after it had dipped beneath the beach at Cromer. 

 The river, I conceive, previous to that upheaval, had flowed to the 

 east or to the west, and had deposited that valley gravel. How it 

 came there under either Colonel Greenwood's or Mr. Fisher's hypo- 

 thesis, I do not understand. I suppose that snow-falls are taken into 

 account under pluvial action. The power of these during the Eein- 

 deer period must have been very great. — I am, etc., 



John Gunn. 

 Irstead Rectory, Jan. 19, 1869. 



