Vol. 58.] PERMIAN, AND TRIASSIC OF THE ISLE OF MAN. 661 
in physical characters with the Permian rocks of the North of 
England, he would point out that Mr. J. Horne had described the 
series as closely resembling the Calciferous Sandstone-rocks of 
the Kirkeudbrightshire coast; and also that the speaker, in visits 
to mainland-sections referred to by the Author, had failed to find 
the similarity on which such stress was laid. 
He acknowledged the difficulty in fixing the age of the Peel 
Series, and in this respect congratulated the Author upon his recent 
most interesting discovery that the majority of the fossils of the 
limestone-fragments were of Ordovician age. He suspected that 
the remaining three supposed Carboniferous species would prove 
to be of the same age. Indeed, it was not impossible that the 
Peel rocks might eventually prove togife of older date than either 
the Author or the speaker had hitherto suspected. This would be, 
to him, a most satisfactory termination of the discussion. 
Mr. Marr wished to deprecate the use of Lake-District: 
terminology in the Isle of Man: it was purely local and strati- 
graphical, and should be confined to the Lake District. He pointed 
out that fragments of Keisley Limestone had been found in the basal 
Carboniferous conglomerates of the neighbourhood of Sedbergh. 
The AvurHor, in reply, said that he accepted Mr. Lamplugh’s 
explanation of the difference between them—that the work of the 
Geological Survey in the Isle of Man was ‘ official,’ while that of 
the Author was a‘labour of love’ At that late hour he would 
merely remark that the Brockrams under discussion are identical in 
composition with those of the borings, acknowledged by Mr. Lamplugh 
to be Permian, and with those of the Lake District accepted by 
every one as Permian. If any doubt remained, it could be solved 
by the examination of the specimens on the table from these three 
sources, and of those in the Museum at Jermyn Street. 
