388 Horace M, Woodward — On the Permian and Trias. 



able principally 'by colour, but also by other mineral characters." 

 Further on Mr. Hull speaks of it, as " this, to all appearance, un- 

 •conformable overlap. of the lower division of the Ti-ias."^ 



In Shropshire, Mr. Hull remarks that " there is some uncertainty 

 as to the exact line of demarcation between the Bunter and Keuper 

 series, as the uppermost beds of the former are sometimes suf- 

 ficiently hard for building purposes."^ 



It is unnecessary to enter further into a discussion of the relations 

 'Of the Bunter and Keuper formations, for these quotations will be 

 isufficient to indicate the unsatisfactory evidence of any considerable 

 ibreak having occurred between the subdivisions of the Triassic rocks 

 dn England, to warrant the notion that " the close of the Bunter 

 ;Sandstone period in England was accompanied by a general «leva- 

 rtion of the whole of the Triassic area, in which condition it remained 

 throughout the period of the Muschelkalk." * 



In the south-west of England, or in the country that lies between 

 IBristol and Exmouth, there is a considerable development of the 

 INew Eed rocks, and these have been generally included in the 

 'Trias.* In the smaller maps two divisions have been made, namely, 



1. New Eed Marl and Dolomitic Conglomei"ate. 



2. New Eed Sandstone and Conglomerate, as in Greenough's 



Geological Map of England and Wales. Or 



1. New Eed or Keuper Marl and Sandstone. 



2. New Eed or Bunter Sandstone, as in Eamsay's Geological Map 



of England and Wales. 



In the published Geological Survey Maps, two divisions are like- 

 "wise made, in South Devon, of New Eed Marl and Sandstone;^ 

 the latter including the pebble-beds of Budleigh Salterton and the 

 breccias of Teignmouth. The Dolomitic Conglomerates of Mendip and 

 those of West Somerset were, however, in places coloured distinctly. 



Such being the case, there must consequently be some confusion 

 in regard to the classification of these Triassic rocks, and more par- 

 ticularly vi^hen no recognized unconformity has been observed to 

 justify the distinctive terms of Bunter and Keuper. 



Turning our attention to the coast-sections between Seaton and 

 Exmouth,^ we find a very clearly developed series. A little east of 

 Seaton, we meet with the lower Ehsetic marls, and thence trace their 



1 Op. cit.-pT^. 86, a7. ^ Idem. p. 64. ^ Hull, op. cit.?^.. 1.06. 



* The name Permian has sometimes crept in througli a misunderstanding of the 

 Dolomitic (or Magnesian) Conglomerate. 



^ These Maps include Sheets 19, 20, 21, and 22. The Sandstone is not designated 

 as Bunter, and the boundary between it and the New Eed Marl is not engraved in 

 Sheets 21 and 22. The whole area has been undergoing reyision, and the new edition 

 of Sheet 19 is now published. 



* This coast-line has been described and diagrams of the sections drawn by De la 

 Beche, Trans. Geol. Soc. 2nd series, vol. i. p. 40, plate viii. (Bridportto Sidmouth) ; 

 Buckland, Idem. p. 95, Plate xiv. (Portland to Lyme Regis, and Bransconibe to 

 Sidmouth) ; Whitaker, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxv. p. 152 (Dowlands 

 Landslip to Babbacombe Bay). See also Pengelly, Trans. Plymouth Inst, for 

 1862-65; Trans. Devon. Assoc, for 1863. My notes on the coast-section (which, 

 however, add nothing to what has been written before) were made in company with 

 my colleague, Mr. W. A. E. Ussher. He has done the greater pari of the re-survey 



