16 MR. E. A. NEWELL AEBER OX THE [Feb. I903, 



E. W. Binney 1 was apparently the first to suspect the correctness 

 of this conclusion, and the rocks in question have been for many 

 years almost universally regarded as Upper Carboniferous in age. 

 As such they appear on the two editions of the Geological Survey 

 Map 2 of the Whitehaven district, published in 1892 and 1895. 



The exact horizon of the Sandstone Series in the Carboniferous, 

 as also the position of the Productive Measures, are still disputed 

 questions. The most recently-published theory on the subject is 

 that both these series are probably older than the true Coal- 

 Measures. 3 



Prof. Hull 4 in his < Coalfields of Great Britain ' did not definitely 

 assign the Sandstone Series to any particular horizon in the Coal- 

 Measures." 1 He classified the Upper Carboniferous formations as 

 follows : — 



'Coal-measures | 1. (?) Massive reddish sandstone of Whitehaven. 

 2,000 feet. J Professor Sedgwick appears doubtful of the 



affinities of this rock — 100 to 150 feet. 



2. Middle, most fully developed at Cleat Moor, 



containing 7 workable coal-seam?. 



3. The Lower, with 4 or 5 thin and inferior coal- 



seams.' 



Mr. J. D. Kendall G has concluded that the whole of the Sand- 

 stone Series is of Upper Coal-Measure age. Mr. T. V. Holmes 7 

 in 1896 stated that 



'the only evidence we have about the position among the Coal-Measures of the 

 Whitehaven Sandstone is that furnished by the Erizington-Hall boring.' 



It would therefore seem that any fresh light, which a study of 

 the fossil plant-remains may tend to throw on the vexed subject 

 of the age of these beds, would be welcome. 



In the first place, the plants obtained from the Sandstone Series 

 confirm, in a most emphatic manner, the conclusions as to the 

 Carboniferous age of the Sandstone Series. The discovery of 

 the Spirorbis-lAmestone, at a higher horizon in the Sandstone 

 Series than that from which the plants were obtained, renders 

 further proof unnecessary. 



The examination of the boring in the Sandstone Series at 

 Frizington Hall by the late Mr. Brockbank 8 in 1891, showed that 



1 E. W. Binnev (55) p. 209. 



2 Geol. Surv. Engl. & Wales, 1-inch map, Quarter-sheet 101 S.W., 1892 & 

 1895. 



3 J. G. Goodchild (n. d.) pp. 20, 27-30. 



4 [My attention has been called, since the reading of this paper, to a footnote 

 (p. 215) in the 3rd edition of ' The Coalfields of Great Britain,' where 

 Pvof. Hull states that ' after a personal inspection of this sandstone, I feel no 

 doubt of its belonging to the Coal-Measures.' The same note, and a classi- 

 fication of formations identical with that in the 3rd edition above-quoted, occurs 

 also in the 4th (latest) edition (1881) p. 227.— E. A. N. A., Dec. 9th, 1902.] 



5 E. Hull (73) p. 215. 



c J. D. Kendall (83) p. 322, (95) p. 235, & (96) p. 204. 



7 T. V. Holmes (96) p. 413. 8 W. Brockbank (91) p. 424. 



