362 DISCTISSIOI^ EAISED BEACHES, ETC., OP SOTJTHERI?^ ENGLAI^D 



the good use he had made of his time on the Sussex coast, pointing 

 out that, on the whole, his conclusions were somewhat different from 

 those of Prof. Prestwich. 



Dr. Evans deeply regretted the indisposition of the Author of the 

 first paper, in whose absence he did not care to discuss the theoretical 

 part of the paper, with much of which he was' at present unable to 

 agree. At the same time, looking at the submergence during the 

 Glacial Period of so much of England north of the Thames, he saw 

 no reason why the south should not have been submerged likewise. 

 He said that all must feel grateful to the Author for having brought 

 together his observations, ranging over so many years, and so 

 carefully arranging his facts. He might, however, ask the question 

 whether too many different deposits had not been classed together 

 under the name of Head or Eubble-drift. 



The speaker regarded Mr. Clement Reid's paper as a most im- 

 portant contribution to Glacial history. His observations seemed to 

 show that, besides the transportation of erratics from northern 

 centres, they were also occasionally derived from southern and 

 western sources. In fact a new field of observation had been 

 opened up. He enquired whether the fluviatile beds mentioned by 

 the Author might not. be connected with the valley of that old river 

 the bed of which had been widened by marine erosion to form the 

 Solent Sea, and at the same time referred to some old speculations 

 of his own, published in his ' Ancient Stone Implements of Great 

 Britain.' 



Mr. W. A. E. UssHER corroborated Mr. Eeid's evidence as to the 

 stranding of erratics upon the Raised Beach platform on the South 

 Coast, having lately discovered two large granite-boulders upon the 

 well-marked Raised Beach platform between Start and Prawle Points 

 in the South Hams, Devon, at the base of a cliff composed of stony 

 loam (' Head '), occupying a broad shelf at the foot of a steep craggy 

 slope composed of mica-schists. He commented on a section of an 

 isolated pinnacle of ' Head ' at Godrevy in Cornwall figured by him 

 in 1879 (' Post-Tertiary Geology of Cornwall '), and quoted by 

 Prof. Prestwich as negativing the idea of the 'Head' being due to 

 subaerial waste on account of the low elevation of the neighbouring 

 coast-line, pointing out that further data as to the contour adjoining 

 the cliff-line were wanting. As to the accumulation of the ' Head ' 

 on the Devon and Cornwall coast being due to submergence, he 

 ventured to differ from Prof. Prestwich on two grounds. First, the 

 only obtainable measure of submergence we had was furnished by 

 the heights of the Raised Beaches relative to present high water ; 

 and Prof. Prestwich's explanation of the ' Head ' necessitated the 

 continuance of the submergence for at least 100 feet without a 

 pause, whereas he had shown in 1879 that in the Camel estuary 

 opposite Padstow a pause in the elevation of the Raised Beach 

 of that coast had permitted the formation of a beach now repre- 

 sented by reefs of consolidated sand, surrounded by the present 

 sand beach between the tide-lines. This proved the presence of two 

 old beaches on the same coast, the one at 5 feet or so above 



