120 



THE GEOLOGIST. 



j)l?xtc iii., fi^'s. 2, 3, 4, 7; plate iv., figs. 1, 3, 4, 5, besides many others not 

 figured by the Kev. T. Wiltshire. Hence we have fossils at Speeton similar 

 to what "are found at Hunstanton. On the west of our Wolds, where I 

 have met with the Ptcd Chalk, I have procured the Terehratula biplicata, 

 T. Hemifjlolma^ Hponrjia paradoxica, and Belemnites, etc. Hence we have in 

 Yorkshire what is found in Norfolk, and also what may be brought to 

 liglit from Lincolnshire. The Terehratula biplicata is the characteristic 

 shell wliere I have searched. However, should any geologist doubt the 

 statement made by me, I shall be ready and most happy at any time to 

 cxcliange a Terehratula biplicata for a fossil from any other formation, 

 l^cbblos arc also plentiful inland from Speeton. — Robt. Mortimer, Timber, 

 Yorkshire. 



Fire by Friction. — [A note to M. Morlot's paper, page 48.] — I have read 

 somewhere of the dry dead branches of trees crossing each other in a forest 

 faking fire by the see-salving action produced by a strong wind. 1 do not 

 know if auy such case be authenticated, but if so, or if fire was produced by 

 the friction of dragging timber or felled trees over hard dry ground, the 

 mitural imitation of the effect by an untutored savage wciild certainly be that 

 of artificial friction, or rubbing; and he would as certainly select light 

 thoroughly dry objects, such as sticks, for his purpose. Hence this rubbing of 

 sticks may have been just as, if not even more likely an accidental discovery 

 as tlic striking of flints or pyrites. — Ed. Geol. 



Fossils from Gainford, Durham. — Sir, — Would you oblige a beginner 

 in the science, and one who finds it dif&cult to obtain aU the information he 

 might (h>si re t hrough books within his reach, by the name and species of the 

 fossils, t he drnwings of which are sent herewith. They were found on the banks 

 of the i i\ cr Tees, near Gainford, Durham. I was struck with the similarity 

 existing hcl ween the larger fossil and those figured in your February number, 

 described by Jno. Tate, Esq., as annelides, and named Eione motiiliformis. At 

 the same time I felt unable to reconcile the idea of their worm-character, with 

 tlie i)rancliings that seemed to exist, and which were shown more plainly in the 

 slal)s as they lay, than in the specimens I brought home with me. One of the 

 drawings sent will illustrate what I refer to. There also seems to be a kind of 

 (•irri along one, but tlie impressions are coarse, and rather indistinct, rendering 

 it dillienlt t o drjiict it. with accuracy. They occurred in flaggy sandstone slate, 

 1 suiijiose it will be in the Carboniferous system. — Yours respectfully. South 

 Durham, Darlington. 



Tlu^si^ are the same kind of fossils as those described by Mr. Tate, and re- 

 ferrcul to by our correspondent, whose sketches of the fossils in question are 

 admirable. \\'e refer him not only to Mr. Tate's figures and descriptions, but 

 also to Mr. Hancock's account of' similar vermiform fossils in the " Amials of 

 Nat. Hist." (December, 1S5S). We are inclined to agree with Mr. Hancock 

 that. tiu\s(> markings have been produced bv the buiTOwings of smaU crustacean 

 jmimals, forming gall(M-ies just bencatli the surface, the roofs of which have 

 fall(Mi in, leaving furrow-like and beaded impressions. The radiate or brush- 

 ike form of marking iutlieated by one of oui' correspondent's sketches would 

 belona: ratlu r to such galleries, or even to bui'ied fuci, than to amielidal 

 erawling-l racks. 



