222 Intelligence and Miscellaneous Articles. 



4. " Further Notes on the Results of some deep Borings in Kent." 

 By W. Whitaker, Esq., B.A., F.G.S. 



This paper contained some details on the borings at Chattenden 

 Barracks and at the Dover Convict Prison, in addition to those 

 already published in the Quarterly Journal of the Society for 1886. 

 Sections of the new borings, one at Strood the other at Lydd, were 

 also given. 



The Chattenden boring had been successful in reaching the Lower 

 Greensand, and a supply of water had been obtained. This result 

 showed that on the section accompanying the previous paper the 

 beds of the Lower Greensand should have been carried rather fur- 

 ther to the northward. 



The Dover boring was abandoned at 931 feet from the surface. 

 The examination of the specimens showed that the thickness 

 formerly assigned to the Lower Greensand should be reduced to 

 31 feet, the upper 5 feet referred to that stage belonging to the 

 base of the Gault, whilst the bottom, 13 feet, together with an addi- 

 tional 69 feet, mostly of clay, subsequently cut through, were, for 

 reasons given, assigned to the Wealden series and probably to the 

 Hastings beds. 



The results of these additional details went to show (1) that, 

 though the Lower Greensand itself was rather thicker at Chatham 

 than at Dover, comprising two divisions, the Folkestone and the 

 Sandgate beds at the former place, and only the Sandgate at the 

 latter, the Lower Cretaceous beds, as a whole, were much thinner at 

 Chatham, owing to the disappearance of the Wealden series; and (2) 

 that in passing to the eastward the Weald clay thinned out before 

 the Hastings beds, instead of the reverse, which was previously 

 suggested. 



The Strood and Lydd sections were merely of importance as fur- 

 nishing details. The paper concluded with some remarks on the 

 best site for additional borings at Dover, in order to prove the deeper- 

 lying rocks. 



XXIV. Intelligence and Miscellaneous Articles. 



" TO WHAT ORDER OF LEVER DOES THE OAR BELONG?" BY 

 FRANCIS A. TARLETON, FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN. 



IN a paper published in the Philosophical Magazine for January, 

 1887, Mr. Abbott has discussed the question, " To what order 

 of Lever does the Oar belong ? " 



The conclusion at which Mr. Abbott has arrived seems to me 

 substantially correct ; but he has, I think, stated it in language 

 which, to say the least, is rather paradoxical, and has supported 

 it by arguments which leave the mind of the reader in a somewhat 

 unsatisfied state. 



To simplify the discussion of the problem, I shall suppose the 

 boat to be moved by two oars on which equal pulls are exerted, and 

 to be perfectly symmetrical on both sides. 



If we regard the rower, boat, and oars as one system, the only forces 



