278 GAPS IN THE LIAS. [May rgo2, 
Discussion. 
The Rev. J. F. Buaxr observed that there were several points 
of considerable interest in the paper, as, for instance, the proof of 
the dwindling-out of the hard beds of the Upper Lias towards 
the Midland Counties. Shore-deposits seemed to be absent here, 
and the Author appeared to indicate that the sandy littoral zone of 
Ammonites capricornus was not to be found in the district described. 
The Author’s junction-bed between the Marlstone and the Upper 
Lias was what he (the speaker) would term an ‘ aggregate-deposit.’ 
He criticized the use of such a term as ‘ ferrocrinoid,’ which appeared 
rather to suggest the advent of such appellations as‘ pyritograptolites.’ 
He failed to see any true crinoidal remains in the slides last shown, 
and the so-called ‘ stems’ had more the look of worm-tubes made up 
of fragments of shell. He enquired whether ‘inter-waste’ was 
intended to express subsequent or contemporaneous erosion. If the 
phenomena described were examples of Mr. Rutley’s ‘ dwindling of 
limestones,’ the most soluble part should disappear first. The strata 
thin naturally eastward, and an original dip would more or less 
tollow the same direction. There were examples of occurrences 
similar to those described in the Lias of the South of England, 
but not in the Yorkshire Lias. 
Mr. W. Wutraker pointed out, with regard to the Author’s 
observation that the calcareous beds on the scarp-face are thin, that 
the conditions of the underground waters are very different ou either 
face. ‘lhe flow is quick on the scarp-face and slow on the dip-slope, 
a difference which would probably affect calcareous deposition. 
Moreover, deposits on a scarp-face are more lable to landslips. 
The Avruor, in reply, said that the microscopic sections shown 
through the lantern were of the Pentacrinite-Bed from the Upper 
Lias; of a crinoid from the Middle Lias; and of stems of the ferro- 
crinoid, also from the Middle Lias. 
