SCIENTIFIC SUMMARY. 
315 
cottage purposes. The thinness of some of the beds is indicative of their 
shallow-water origin, as well as perhaps of their local extension. But as 
this is a feature in the Middle Drift sands, as far as he has been an observer, 
it is not worth while to state more than that he believes the following to 
be a good typical section of the Cheshire sands : — 
— n 
EEET 
Sand (current-bedded) ..... 
. 21 
Fine Gravel (with shells) 
. . 3 
Ochreous Sand ...... 
. 3 
Shelly Gravel 
. 3 
Fine Clay 
. 8 
Stiff Clay, with pebbles and shells . 
. 30 
Brick Earth 
. 8 
Total 
. 76 
Geological Magazine , No. 70. 
Fossil Botany in 1869. — Mr. W. Carruthers gives an excellent list of the 
memoirs published in 1869. It appeared originally in the Journal of 
Botany , but has been reprinted in the Geological Magazine for April. 
The Suffolk Bone-bed and the Norfolk Stone-bed. — At the meeting of the 
Geological Society on May 25 Professor Huxley presented a paper on this 
point by Mr. E. Bay Lankester. The author, whose paper elicited much 
discussion, pointed out that the recognition of the distinction of these two 
deposits from the overlying shelly crags was an important step in the deter- 
mination of the history of these beds. He combated the notion that the 
Bone-bed and Stone-bed were identical in their contents ; and especially 
dwelt on the differences of the mammalian fauna found in the two. The 
late Dr. Falconer’s views, hitherto prevalent, consisting in regarding the 
fauna of the Suffolk Bone-bed, Norfolk Stone-bed, and Forest-bed as all of 
one and the same history and extent, he most strongly opposed. Rhinoceros 
Schleiermachieri, Tapirus prisons , Plipparion, Hycena antiqua , and a well- 
defined Miocene Mastodon (Fauna 1), had been found in the Bone-bed 
below the Suffolk Crag ; the first three in some abundance, but never in the- 
Stone-bed or Forest-bed of Norfolk. They belonged to a different fauna 
from that indicated by the other mammals common to the Bone-bed and 
Stone-bed (Fauna 2), viz. Mastodon arvernensis, Equus sp., and certain 
forms of Cervus (studied by Mr. Boyd Dawkins). On the other hand, the 
Elephas meridionalis (Fauna 3), occurring in the Norfolk Stone-bed and in 
the Forest-bed, had never been found in the Suffolk Bone-bed. Mr. Lan- 
kester suggested that the association of the first two of these three groups of 
mammals in Suffolk, and of the second two in Norfolk, might be explained 
by the hypothesis that they succeeded one another in time, the first (late- 
Miocene) being confined to Suffolk, and dating from before the Diestien 
period, since he had obtained a Mastodon tooth of the M. tapiroides form 
enclosed in a Diestien box-stone, the third having existed in Norfolk at a 
period subsequent to the Coralline Crag, but before the Norwich Crag was 
deposited, chiefly represented in the Lower part of the Forest-bed, but also 
in the Stone-bed, whilst the second group of mammals had existed in both 
areas at an intermediate period. Mr. Lankester maintained that this was 
