56 
the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester, on 
the nature of the boundary between the Carboniferous and 
the Triassic or Permian rocks of Cheshire. 
The subject is of the highest importance from both a 
scientific arid economical point of view, and though Mr. 
Binney does not exactly agree with the results arrived at 
by my colleagues on the Geological Survey and myself 
I am very well pleased that he has called attention to the 
matter. Though Mr. Binney has spoken very modestly of 
the value of his labours, I need hardly say that the 
criticisms of a gentleman of such large local experience are 
always welcomed by us. Remarks coming from such a 
quarter demand an answer, and so give us a favourable 
opportunity of bringing before the public the results of our 
labours, and restating more fully our views. 
I venture to think however that Mr. Binney has scarcely 
acted in a manner worthy of his great and well deserved 
reputation, when he attempts to settle the geology of an 
obscure tract of ground by the evidence afforded in that 
tract alone, and neglects the light thrown upon its structure 
by an examination of adjoining districts. 
I shall try and avoid this error, and begin my examination 
of the evidence at a point south of Congleton. Between this 
point and Macclesfield a number of sections were obtained 
along the boundary, the most important of which are figured 
by myself in Figs. 1 — 4 of the Geological Survey Memoir on 
the country round Stockport, Macclesfield, Congleton and 
Leek. These sections are faithful representations of ivhat 
was actually seen , and in no case has any attempt been 
made to fill up hypothetically gaps where the rocks were 
hidden from view. In one case, Fig. 2, I actually saw the 
