Sept. 28, 1888.] 



SCIENTIFIC NEWS. 



345 



ciently appreciated. This truth by no means holds 

 good with reference to the lower races only. Our own 

 ancestors in the dark ages, long after they were nomi- 

 nally Christians, clung to superstitions which the light of 

 science gradually enabled them to shake off. Gradually, 

 however, the progress of knowledge freed us from this 

 terrible dread. We do not, I think, generally realise 

 how much our ancestors suffered from the overshadow- 

 ing horror of this fearful superstition, and how much in 

 this respect the advance of science has raised and puri- 

 fied, not indeed Christianity itself, but our appreciation 

 of it. But however this may be, as regards the lower 

 races, I think we see that as men have risen in civili- 

 sation, their religions have risen with them : they have 

 gradually acquired higher and purer conceptions of 

 divine power. Nevertheless, though there is much in 

 the religion of savages which is erroneous and even 

 grotesque, it is not less worthy of respect as an attempt 

 to arrive at the truth and to fulfil a duty. 



Some of you whom I have the honour of addressing 

 this evening will, I have no doubt, have the opportunity 

 of observing savages in their native abodes. I trust I 

 may express the hope that if so, you will avail your- 

 selves of every chance of adding to our knowledge of 

 this interesting branch of science — a science interesting 

 to the philosopher ; still more to the Englishman, be- 

 longing as we do to an empire which comprises many 

 races of men, and people in every stage of civilisation ; 

 and one which is most encouraging in its results, since 

 it appears to prove that, though there have been ex- 

 ceptional periods of degradation and decay, the history 

 of mankind has on the whole been one of progress, and 

 that we may fairly look forward to the future with con- 

 fidence and with hope. 



— f-^w^nC**:^ — ■ 



INTERNATIONAL GEOLOGICAL 

 CONGRESS. 



'"THE Reporter (Mr. J. E. Marr) of the British Sub- 

 Committee on the Classification and Nomenclature 

 of the Cambrian and Silurian Rocks, states in his report 

 that " in the case of the Cambrian and Silurian, there is 

 a pretty general agreement as to the position of the 

 boundaries of the various series which make up the 

 systems ; but, on the other hand, it is hopeless to attempt 

 any grouping of the series into these two systems which 

 shall give satisfaction to all parties." After reviewing 

 the opinions of the various authorities, he gives the fol- 

 lowing table embodying their views : — 



Sedgwick 



Murchison 



Lyell and 

 Hicks. 



Lapworth. 



Geological 

 Survey. 



Silurian 



(1) Upper 

 Silurian 



Upper Si- 

 lurian 



Silurian 



Upper Silu- 

 rian 



(2) Upper- 

 Cambrian 



Lower Silu- 

 lian 



Lower Si- 

 lurian 



Ordovician 



1 Lower Si- 



(3) Middle 

 Cambrian 



Primordial 

 Silurian 



I^Cam- 

 j brian. 



V Cambrian 



lurian. 



Lower 

 Cambrian 



Cambrian 



J- Cambrian 



(1) Murchison and Geological Survey include Lower Landovery 

 in their Lower Silurian, (i) Upper Cambrian, nearly = Cambro- 

 Silurian of some authors. (3) Includes Arenig, which is placed by 

 Lapworth in his Ordovician, and by Lyell and Hicks in their 

 Lower Silurian. 



This subject gave rise to interesting and animated 

 discussion, which took place on Tuesday the 18th Sep- 

 tember, at 10.30. 



As all the reports were taken as read, the Chairman 

 of the Committee (Professor Capellini) called upon 

 Dr. Hicks to open the question, and the latter gave 

 a short sketch of the origin and history of the difficulty 

 declaring himself to be, as a pupil of Mr. Salter, and 

 equally attached to the Geological Survey and to Cam- 

 bridge, simply an independent seeker after truth. He 

 laid stress on the point that there were three distinct 

 faunas, the lowest being the one that he had so large a 

 share in discussing, while the middle, the part about 

 which the whole of the disagreements has arisen, is that 

 containing the primordial fauna of Barrande. The division 

 line between these is the top of the Tremadoc with its 

 Olenus fauna, the Palaeontological break being laigest 

 here. The Cambridge school, on account of the physical un- 

 conformity at the Llandovery beds, make their great divi- 

 sion in the latter. Dr. Hicks proposed that Professor Lap- 

 worth's suggestion of Ordovician for the middle series 

 should be adopted, as solving the difficulty and giving 

 their own way to both the Geological Survey and the 

 Cambridge School. 



Mr. Marr, who began by expressing his regret at the 

 absence of Professor Hughes and its cause, followed the 

 same line of thought as Dr. Hicks, and supported the 

 adoption of the term Ordovician. He, however, though 

 that the Cambrian-Silurian rocks formed a whole so co- 

 herent and with such a common facies that a designation 

 for the whole group would be of great advantage and 

 proposed the name Barrandian in that sense. 



Professor Lapworth, in an emphatic address, accentuated 

 the views of the preceding speakers, describing, with the 

 aid of a large section of the geological formations, the 

 relative importance of each of the three great periods, 

 and pointing out that as the Mesozoic was divisible into 

 the two great Jurassic and Cretaceous groups, so the 

 Palaeozoic had two main divisions, the proterosoic (Cam- 

 brian, Ordovician, and Silurian) and the deuterozoic (Devo- 

 nian, Carboniferous, and Permian). Against Murchison's 

 classification he urged that Murchison's stratigraphical 

 work was full of errors, and that where the latter had 

 mapped a regular succession, he (Professor Lapworth) had 

 traced an unconformity over a hundred miles, and that a 

 large part of the Upper Caradoc had been completely 

 swept away. As to the Taconic he had heard only two 

 days ago that its fauna was quite below the Cambrian, 

 and it was thus outside the question. In conclusion, he 

 affirmed his belief that his own term (Ordovician) must 

 inevitably be adopted, and that no result the Congress 

 might arrive at would in any way affect its ultimate 

 acceptance. 



Mr. Walcott, palaeontologist, United States Geological 

 Survey, in giving the results of his work in America, 

 stated that the true Taconic fauna of Emmens, or Olenellus 

 fauna, containing 42 genera and 112 species, occurs below 

 the Paradoxides fauna both in America and Europe. He 

 supported the classification and nomenclature of Profes- 

 sor Lapworth. 



Dr. Sterry Hunt, of Montreal, also supported Professor 

 Lapworth's terminology, and said the Taconian was below 

 Barrand's primordial fauna, and the Cambrian corres- 

 ponded to the Urschiefer. He opposed Mr. Marr's 

 suggestion of Barrandian as a mere personal name, and 

 on that ground objectionable. 



Professor Torell, Stockholm, did not accept the name 



