94 



locality in tolerably large number. On examining the new- 

 material I have not, however, found anything of importance to 

 be added to my previous description. As to the combination of 

 faces the crystals are very simple; being bounded only by the 

 base, the hexagonal prism and a hexagonal pyramid, which 

 could not with certainty be determined owing to the condition 

 of the planes (Fig. 7, Plate V). 



On a few small crystals among the new material, the 

 pyramidal faces of which are somewhat brighter than the 

 faces of those first examined, I have made some measurements 

 which gave the following angular values : 



(ЮГЗ) : (0001) = 26° 12^ 25° 54^ 26° 56', 26° 41^ 26° 42^ 

 Mean == 25° 27'. 



All of these values are lower than the value calculated for 

 the form {lOlS}, viz. 27°41'. However, the pyramidal faces 

 are curved around the axis of the zone [lOlO, OOOl], and 

 their lustre is best near the base and decreases towards the 

 fundamental prism. It is probable, therefore, that the part of 

 the face which gives the most distinct shimmer reflexion forms 

 with the base a smaller angle that the face as a whole would 

 do. On the ground of these measurements only, one is not, 

 therefore, justified in assuming that the axial ratio of the 

 Greenlandian catapleiite should be other than that of the 

 Norwegian. Nor can any other simple symbol be derived from 

 the values found than 



у = {юГз}. 



This form also occurs, though rarely, on the catapleiite 

 from Langesund; on type IH, which is to be described below, 

 it is constantly present. 



The crystal individuals are grouped together in a great 

 variety of positions. There is often a perfect intercrossing of 



