5 74 ON THE SECTION AT HORDWELL CLIFFS. 



in places. Other fossils in layers are : Oliva Branderi, Psammobia 

 solida, Melania Tiordeacea, Cyrena cycladiformis. 



These sands are exceedingly rich in fossils in layers. "We have 

 on a former occasion * given a list of them obtained a little west of 

 the path down to the beach at Long-Mead End ; but we had not then 

 the opportunity of seeing these beds so well exposed, which, as we 

 have mentioned, were especially favourably seen this time. 



(g) Below is white sand, apparently unfossiliferous ; fully 10 feet 

 of it are seen ; but this may possibly be somewhat less than its real 

 thickness. Owing to the tumbled material it is not easy to see its 

 base and summit at the same time. 



Adding up, we should have a thickness of 17| feet for the Upper 

 Bagshot Sands, and 87 j feet for the freshwater Lower Headon. 



The limit between them is, of course, slightly arbitrary, since the 

 marine shells gradually die out, while the freshwater ones, such as 

 Dreisssna, are occasionally found in the uppermost estuarine beds, 

 where the passage begins. We place the line of division one bed 

 above where we last found Oliva Branderi. In the top bed of the 

 estuarine series is occasionally seen a stray Potamomya or Dreissena ; 

 otherwise we should say that there was a definite line at the lignite, 

 dividing the freshwater shells from the estuarine and marine. The 

 Oliva is common to the clays below, well seen at Beacon Bunney. 



It may be considered a marine inhabitant, and is one of the well- 

 known links connecting the Upper-Bagshot sands with the Barton 

 beds. It is not found higher up in the series. 



Discussion. 



The President spoke of the pains always bestowed by the late 

 Mr. Tawney on his geological work, and invited discussion. 



Prof. Peestwich remarked upon the few papers that had been 

 published on the Hampshire coast, hence the value of this paper ; 

 but it was hardly possible to discuss it without a map or sections, 

 especially as it had necessarily been much abbreviated. 



Prof. Jtjdd said that the paper seemed to be a critical one, and 

 the criticism was rather of the nature of a statement that the authors 

 had not seen what several distinguished observers, such as Mr. F. 

 Edwards, Mr. Searles Wood, Dr. Wright, and others stated they had 

 distinctly seen. He himself had seen a portion of the bed in ques- 

 tion. This bed, which had been seen in situ by so many observers, 

 we were now asked to believe was only a squeezed-out mass. It 

 was remarkable that one of the authors of this paper had assisted 

 most of the geologists mentioned above, when either he failed to 

 persuade them that his present view was the right one, or his 

 memory had failed him as to what he then thought on the subject. 

 The coast had receded greatly at this point, the beds were very 

 variable, and exact identification of them over wide areas was not 

 possible. 



* Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxxyii. p. 115 (1881). 



