In the Geological Magazine for 1884 some Mesozoic fossils, obtained from near Mount Hamilton and the Peak Station, were noticed by me with figures and descriptions where the specimens were fairly well preserved. Since then additional specimens have been procured from adjoining districts. The general character of the facies is fairly similar to that already noticed in 1884; but on the whole, perhaps, the specimens are scarcely so well preserved. Since then additional specimens have been procured from adjoining districts. The general character of the facies is fairly similar to that already noticed in 1884; but on the whole, perhaps, the specimens are scarcely so well preserved. According to the opinion of those who have had most experience, these fossils may be regarded as of “Cretaceo-Jurassic” age, though I am not aware tliat such undoubted Cretaceous forms as Ancyloceras, etc., have been discovered in the beds whence the fossils forming the subject of these notes have been derived.

For many years my thoughts have been occupied with the phenomena of eruption at or near the surface, and although a detailed study of the Vesuvian volcano and its products gave me the key to the mechanism of eruption and injection of igneous matter near the surface, I was always at a loss to understand, on the older theories, how lava could ever start upwards in fissures

This interesting species has hitherto been known only by the single type-specimen, a mandibular tooth, contained in the York Museum, originally described by Mr. T. P. Barkas, and recently very correctly redescribed as well as figured by Mr. A. Smith Woodward. It so happens that some years ago a considerable number of these teeth, both mandibular and palatal, occurred in the Borough Lee ironstone: my own collection contains no less than forty specimens, and there are many others in the Museum of Science and Art, so that I may now add considerably to the knowledge of the species

From one cause and another efficient education in modern languages has been exceptional in this country until quite recent years; and so it is no reproach to the geologist for him to have to confess that he “can't read German.” He must therefore get some friend to translate for him, or wait until translations of many important papers and books are published; and in many cases this never happens. So it is thought that towards the present controversy, which has been raised about the schists, etc., of the Val Bedretto and the adjoining districts, the mental attitude of many geological students may be pretty much that of the Bavarian veteran. It is with the hope of throwing a little light on the subject that the present writer has put pen to paper. For it is not too much to say that the subject is one of critical importance.

Free discussion is a valuable aid to research when entered upon in a proper spirit. I am glad to see the contribution of Mr. Jukes-Browne to this subject, together with the letter from Prof. Bonney, in the May Number of the Geological Magazine.

Mr. R. Storms has recently described (Bull. Soc. Beige Géol. vol. iii. p. 163, 1889) the vertebras of a large Tunny from the Antwerp Crag, which he has named Thynnus Scaldesii, and Mr. A. Smith Woodward, in the April number of the Annals and Magazine of Natural History, records the same species from the Coralline Crag of Suffolk; it is especially interesting, therefore, to be able at this time to notice the occurrence of the common Tunny (T. thynnus) in the Crotner “Forest Bed.”

Mr. Sorby, in his Address as President of the Eoyal Microscopical Society in 1877, dwelt very forcibly on the interest and value attaching to researches into the original nature of the materials composing sedimentary deposits, and stated that, so far as he was aware, but little had been done in this direction by means of the microscope (Monthly Microscop. Journal, vol. xvii.).