some 
juZJut v 
The best way of answering your enquiry is to copy 
renarks in Pro r, Hawkins ! rep ly • - 
*’My opinion is (at present) that the Echinoids in 
question can hardly be older than Pleistocene or 
late Pliocene; but the material is not very easy 
to study . The Cidaroid radicles (many of which have 
proved to be Pholas crypts J) are very worn and 
broken, while the tests ( D La demo id and Spatangid) 
are crystallized into their matrix in a tantalizing 
way that defies adequate preparation. If there is a 
chance of obtaining clearer and better preserved 
material, it should assuredly be taken. Meanwhile I 
will go ahead (with what speed I can) in studying the 
existing specimens - one of the chief causes of my 
slowness is the modernness of the types - I am 
insufficiently familiar with the Recent Echinoids to 
feel happy in ascribing specific names to ferns that 
seem systematically lleontoiogical but lithologically 
very palaeontological. One or two really well- 
preserved and extra ctible specimens might easily 
settle all my d oub t s . 
I should very much welcome such additions, but if 
there is to be nothing more than an increase in the 
number of equivocal fragments I would rather be soared 
them ! 
I 
