•50 LITTLE HEATH S.ODS AXD GBAVELS. [vol. lxXV. 



the Shenley-Barnet ridge, he had found the occurrence of Lower 

 Greensand chert in these gravels to he limited in a north- westerly 

 direction by a fairly well-defined line crossing the area from south- 

 west to north-east. This seems to confimi, to some extent, the 

 view that the gravels came from the south and not from, the north, 

 and that they are of earlier date than the Thames Valley. 



Mr. Gilbebt, in reply, remarked upon the practical absence of 

 criticism upon the essential points of his paper, namely, the origin 

 and the age of the beds. That the gravels were not G-lacial was 

 abundantly clear, alike from their composition, uniformity, and 

 situation. Regarding their age, that there was a Pliocene sub- 

 mergence during which certain beds south of London were deposited 

 was beyond dispute. It was highly improbable that such sub- 

 mergence should have failed to reach this district. These beds 

 conformed in every respect to the theory of marine deposition, and 

 linked themselves up naturally with the High-Plateau Gravels and 

 the South London beds. This was all that could be said, as only 

 the discovery of contemporaneous fossils could place the matter 

 beyond controversy. Lhfortunately, the nature of the deposits 

 did not afford ground for very confident hope that this evidence 

 would be obtained. 



Mr. Babeow, in a brief reply, stated that he quite accepted 

 Mi*. Dewev's remarks on the area about Chobham Ridges. 



[January 17th, 1920.] 



