30 William Whitaker—The Red Chalk of Norfolk. 
(where there is no Upper Greensand) was worn away before the de- 
position of the Chalk Marl, and the hard nodules and fossils were left 
behind, to form part of the overlying deposit. Now we may infer 
that in Norfolk the Gault clay has been worn away also, and even to 
a greater extent, for that clay thins northward from Cambridgeshire 
through Norfolk. We might therefore expect to find some remains 
of Gault in the latter county, as in the former, in the overlying 
deposit. I would suggest, therefore, to those geologists who may 
visit Hunstanton that they should examine the fossils of the Red 
Chalk in order to see whether any of them show signs of having 
been derived, either from having worn surfaces, from their contents 
differing from the surrounding matrix, or, if there be no such 
difference, from anything that may tend to show alteration or re- 
placement of the original earthy contents. As far as I know no 
evidence of this sort has been recorded. 
The rarity of species elsewhere confined to the Upper Greensand 
need not surprise us. That division is probably the least constant 
in the Cretaceous Series, and is not known to occur for many miles 
from our Red Rock. 
Neither am I much surprised at the non-occurrence of the charac- 
teristic Chalk Marl species, noticed by Mr. Jukes-Browne, for, as 
stated above, the Chalk Marl seems to have thinned out some miles 
south of Hunstanton, and it has not yet proved very fossiliferous in 
Norfolk. ‘ 
I have now reached the last stage of this address, and am 
sorry to say the most difficult one. From the data we have, 
I cannot see the way to a definite conclusion as to the precise 
age of the Hunstanton Red Rock, nor do I see from what quarter 
we are to expect fresh help. 
The stratigraphical evidence, taken alone, seems to me to be 
in favour of the Chalk theory, as may be seen from what has 
gone before; but the palzontological evidence seems to put a 
veto on this, unless we can explain the occurrence of the many 
Gault forms, either by derivation (of which we have had no 
evidence) or by local survival to later times, and something of 
this sort may have occurred: at all events I have found numbers 
of what appears to be the Gault form Belemnites minimus in the 
Chalk Marl of Norfolk. 
The paleontological evidence is really vague; but it does, to 
my mind, lead to certain negative conclusions, thus clearing the 
way. I think it shows that the rock is neither Gault only, nor 
Upper Greensand only, nor a mixture of the two; for how either 
of these three theories can hold against the number of Chalk fossils 
that occur passes my understanding. 
Arguing from its contained fossils, indeed, we seem to be left 
two alternatives only, as to the geological age of the rock. Firstly, 
that it represents the lowest part of the Chalk, the Upper Green- 
sand, and the upper part of the Gault, having been laid down 
at the same time as those deposits, but under different conclitions, 
