Revised Notes on Fossils. 239 



" I proceed to comply with your request of forwarding to 

 you as complete a set of the fossils as I can get together. 

 I am not able, however, to send specimens of all those which 

 were in the drawing previously forwarded, many of which do 

 not belong to me. 



" As the Nautili already sent you do not appear to have 

 been sufficiently perfect, I have selected three or four, which 

 will I hope, supply the deficiency. The one which is cut, 

 displays the siphuncle in a very central position, which I think 

 you will find not to be the case with others. In most of them 

 the siphuncle is decidedly nearer the inner margin, as shewn 

 in the drawing. 



" I send also specimens of five or six different species of 

 Ammonite. They are not very perfect ; but this fossil is gene- 

 rally found in the middle of large masses of hard limestone, 

 and is therefore very difficult to extract. Two of them are 

 identical with specimens represented in the drawings, and I 

 think two others are of the same species as the other two 

 figures, but smaller specimens. 



" I send you two papers of what we suppose to be Hamites. 

 In general they are got out of the stone only in small detach- 

 ed pieces, as in the paper marked No. 2 ; but if this fossil is 

 a Hamite, the specimen in No. 2, is of a different shape from 

 any representation I have ever seen of it. 



" There are sufficient specimens of Baculite, to shew the 

 different states of fossilization. There are also, 1 imagine, 

 two species, as one is quite smooth even when the external 

 shell is best preserved, and the other protected by raised 

 tubercles. 



(C 1 send also two Echini, which are very good specimens of 

 the only species I have. There is another sort, which is in 

 the drawings, but I have no specimens of it. 



"The paper marked 3, contains a piece of calcareous Wood 

 from Seedrapett, bored by some sort of Teredina, and I may 

 mention here, that I have put at the bottom of the box a 

 good specimen of the silicified Wood, from the red sand at 

 Trivacary.* 



* This has been cut for the microscope, and proved by Mr. Grant to be fossil fir 

 or pine, confirming the previous examinations of the same fossil by Dr. Wight of 

 Madras, who also found it to be pine, as appears from the concluding paragraph 

 of Mr. Kaye's letter.— Ed. 



