1864.] 



Note on the Spiti Fossils, 



235 



putting out and examining these fossils collected by himself, and Mr. 

 Mallet, visited the Society's Museum to compare those species already 

 named and described by Mr. Blanford. Among these he noticed 

 several species of which no specimens had occurred to himself or to 

 Mr. Mallet, and on examining these specimens more closely he no- 

 ticed also a difference in the mineral character of the rock in which 

 these species occurred. He at once, too hastily as I think, and with- 

 out examining into the history of these fossils, but knowing well the 

 neglect with which the Society's collections had been treated, came to 

 the conclusion that these were not fossils from Spiti at all, but were 

 English Liassic fossils, which had got mixed up with the true Spiti 

 fossils. This idea he communicated at once to Mr. Blanford who at 

 first rejected the notion, but subsequently, as stated by himself ? adopt- 

 ed it fully. 



Believing that there are no sufficient grounds for this conclusion^ 

 I cannot avoid noticing it. The question as regards Dr. Gerard's 

 fossils alone would be of minor importance, but this matter involves 

 a principle subversive of all sound progress in our knowledge of the 

 Geological distribution of organic remains. 



The grounds on which Mr. Blanford has rejected all those fossils which 

 he had identified with English Liassic species are stated to be these. 



1. Mr. Theobald's belief to that effect, which belief I know to 

 have been based on a consideration of a slight difference in the mine- 

 ral character of the rock. 



2nd. An examination of undoubted Whitby fossils. 



3rd. An examination of Col. Strachey's collection from the Mti 

 pass, north of Kumaon. 



4th. An examination of General Hardwicke's collection from Nepal., 

 and — 



5th. An examination of Jacquemont's collection from near Spiti. 



Putting out of the question for the moment Jacquemont's collec- 

 tions which were from nearly the same ground as Gerard's, I can- 

 not see in what way the nature of the fossils found at Whitby in 

 Yorkshire, of those found in Nepal some five hundred miles off, or at 

 Niti more than one hundred miles off, can possibly determine the fact 

 of the occurrence or non-occurrence of certain forms at Spiti. There 

 is no question here as to the identity or even the similarity of the 

 species 3 in determining which a comparison of the others would un- 



1 



% 

 I . 



n 



