Correspondence — Mr. W. W. Stoddart. 287 



am of opinion that the Bay of Morcamb^ is a much less ancient inlet 

 than the Frith of Clyde, and the Kyles of Bute, where Mr. Smith, 

 Mr. Sowerby, my revered friend Dr. Landsborough, and numerous 

 acute observers have worked so successfully : the coeval shore line of 

 this part of Britain, viz. Cumberland and Lancashire, doubtless stood 

 a long way further out. E. Hodgson. 



Ulvekston, \5th March. 



"GEOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORWICH." 



[Proceedings of the Bristol Naturalists' Society, Vol. iii., Nos. 7, 8, and 9, 1868, 

 Noticed in Geological Nagazine for April, p. 177.] 



Sir, — Permit me to reply to the somewhat stringent remarks of 

 H. B. W. in your last number, and to suggest that it would have 

 been much kinder if H. B. W. had ascertained whether the short 

 abstract were a correct resume of the original paper,'^ 



The different statements made at Norwich respecting the geology 

 of that county were so conflicting and contradictory as to call forth 

 a remark to that effect from the President of the Geological section 

 (see Norfolk News, Aug. 22, 1868). So puzzling were they that I, 

 in common with many others, felt really " out of my element," 

 and " at sea," and therefore had recourse to " literature" for informa- 

 tion to which also I would refer H. B. W. For instance, I found 

 that the Norwich beds are said to have been seen to directly overlie 

 the Ked Crag at Chill esford (vide Elem. Geol. pp. 196, 198). Again, 

 the same authority states that the Bridlington beds have about the 

 same age as the Chillesford (loc. cit. p. 198). 



With regard to my statement respecting the Potamides, 1 still see 

 no reason why they should not be that sub-genus, nor can I discover 

 any difference between the Bramerton shells and many that I obtained 

 from the fluvio-marine beds of the Isle of Wight. The shells of the 

 Potamides cannot be distinguished from the Ceriihia [vide Wood's 

 Crag Mollusca, p. 68) in their conchological character, but the former 

 lived in estuarine or freshwater, while the latter lived in marine 

 habitats. 



With the Bramerton fossils are found some freshwater shells, and 

 therefore the conclusion that they were Potamides is a very likely one.^ 

 Mr. Wood also makes a statement to that effect (Crag Moll. p. 68). 

 Sir Charles says (Elem. p. 196), "It is clear that these beds have 

 accuraulated at the bottom of the sea near the mouth of a river." 



With regard to the antiquity of the Eed Crag, I simply stated that 

 the Eed Crag was the oldest Pliocene formation, ivitli loliich I had then 

 to do, and H. B. W. may fairly have conjectured this, for, probably, 

 there are few to whom the Coralline Crag is not famUiar. 



^ This is wi-itten Morcamb in Beck's work " Annales Furnesiensis," the best work 

 we have. — E.H. 



^ "We are exceedingly sorry to learn that the Bristol Naturalists' Society are in the 

 habit of issuing their Proceedings without first consulting authors whose "papers they 

 intend to publish, and obtaining their corrections to the same. We would earnestly 

 recommend Mr. Stoddart in future to insist upon seeing and revising his own papers 

 before publication, in whatever Journal they may appear. — ^Edit. 



3 Fotamides does not occur in the Norwich Crag. — Edit. 



