value, both for imperial and local purposes. The average for the whole country of the rates raised by local taxation alone was, for 1891, 3s. 8d. in the £, to which must be added imperial taxes and the tithe. It may be stated roughly, that for every 100. of yearly unearned increment' the State is benefited in one way or another by 257., or one-fourth of the amount. The discovery of a new coal-field would cause increased prosperity in the district in which it occurred, and from this the State, through taxation, would derive great though indirect advantage. The growing difficulty of finding employment for the ever-increasing population of these islands is a strong reason why this Survey should be undertaken. Part of the cost might be borne by the landowners under whose property any minerals were discovered. Certain districts should be selected with the consent of the Local Authorities, and Parliamentary power taken to charge a royalty on any minerals obtained below a certain depth. Landowners would probably welcome proposals to make borings on their estates on such conditions. In the first instance, however, the Survey should map out accurately the subterranean limits of existing coal-fields, or mineral-bearing rocks, but trial borings should be put down in different localities, and each new boring would help to show more plainly the direction in which further investigations should be made. Much light would be thrown by such a Survey on the circulation of underground waters, a matter of great practical importance. The expense of boring would be much reduced if undertaken on a large scale, as machinery and apparatus would be available again and again. The Survey would employ its own workmen, who would become increasingly efficient and economical. 4. The Cladodonts of the Upper Devonian of Ohio. Numerous specimens of the Cladodonts of the Cleveland Shale in Ohio have been found by Dr. William Clark. They for the first time reveal to us the general form of the fishes to which belonged the teeth that have alone so long represented the genus Cladodus. The fossils are in very fair preservation, but their state of pyritisation has obscured many of the details of their structure. So far as regards their form, however, we now know that they were long, slender fishes, resembling in their character the sharks of the present day; that they possessed well-developed and powerful pectoral and caudal, with weak ventral, fins, the dorsals being unknown; that they were for the most part, or altogether, spineless; that at least one species possessed cladadont teeth of more than one pattern; and that they had near the hind end of the body a peculiar flat expansion or membrane of rudely semicircular form, which gave to the caudal extremity when seen from above the outline of a sharp-pointed shovel. The largest whole specimen yet found shows a fish of about 6 feet in length, but detached teeth and other fragments indicate others of double this size, and supply abundant proof that in late Devonian times, and in the North American area, the elasmobranch fishes had attained very great proportions and a high stage of development. Hitherto the Cladodonts have been regarded as, in the main, characterising the Lower Carboniferous rocks, but we now find them abounding in the earlier Devonian strata, and, as shown by the contents of their stomachs, preying-in some cases at least on the smaller placoderms of the same area. From the evidence of the new specimens it appears most likely that the species already defined from single and isolated teeth can no longer be maintained. For details see the author's papers in the 'American Geologist' for 1893–4–5. 5. The Great Devonian Placoderms of Ohio, with Specimens. The Upper Devonian Shales of Ohio have recently afforded a remarkable series of fossil fishes rivalling in size and interest those found many years ago in the Old Red Sandstones of similar age in Scotland, and described by Agassiz and Hugh Miller. The earliest of these, Dinichthys, was closely studied, and its structure was well explained by the late Dr. Newberry. It was an immense armour-clad fish whose head measured from 2 to 3 feet in length. Titanichthys, the second of the group, though less massive, was of yet larger size. Gorgonichthys, the third, was described by the present writer in 1893, and, so far as is yet known, was the most formidable of all, possessing jaws of enormous size and thickness, above 24 inches long, ending in teeth or points from 6 to 9 inches in length. The last of the four, Brontichthys, of which a description was also published by the writer in the American Geologist' for 1894, is equally heavy and of equal size, but differs from all the rest in possessing very massive symphysial portions in the mandibles with sockets apparently for the reception of teeth, as in Titanichthys. Of the two last-named genera only the jaws are yet known with exactness. Other portions have been found of Gorgonichthys, but are still embedded in the matrix. So far as can at present be determined, all the four are closely allied to Coccosteus, and belong to the same family. The set of casts exhibited in illustration of the fossils have been prepared by their discoverer, Dr. William Clark, and faithfully represent the originals, of many of which only single specimens are yet known. The labour of extricating them from the pyritous shale has proved very heavy, and much yet remains to be done in this direction. 6. Notes on the Phylogeny of the Graptolites. By Prof. H. A. NICHOLSON, M.D., D.Sc., F.G.S., and J. E. MARR, M.A., F.R.S., Sec. G.S. The authors note that the number of stipes possessed by graptolites has been looked upon as a character of prime importance, many genera being based on the possession of a certain number. Again, the angle of divergence' has been looked upon as an important factor in the diagnosis of families. They are, however, led to believe that a character of essential importance in dealing with the classification of the graptolites, and one which, in all probability, indicates the true line of descent, is found in the shape and structure of the hydrothecæ, the point of next importance as indicating genetic relationship being the angle of divergence.' These views are illustrated by reference to forms belonging to the 'genera' Bryograptus, Dichograptus, Tetragraptus, and Didymograptus, which appear in turn in this sequence. Out of nine Tetragrapti (and the authors know of no other forms referred to this genus which are represented by well-preserved examples), eight are closely represented by forms of Didymograptus, which are closely comparable with them as regards characters of hydrothecæ and amount of angle of divergence,' whilst the ninth is comparable with a Didymograptus as regards 'angle of divergence' only. Moreover, four of the Tetragrapti are comparable as regards the two above-named important characters with forms of Dichograptus and Bryograptus with eight or more branches, and the authors confidently predict the discovery of forms belonging to these or closely allied many-branched genera,' agreeing with the remaining Tetragrapti in what they regard as essential characters. They give details showing the points of agreement of each group of the various series, including a two-branched, a four-branched, and a many-branched form, and point out how difficult it is to understand how the extraordinary resemblances between the various species of Tetragraptus and Didymograptus (to take one example) have arisen, if, as usually supposed, all the species of the genera have descended from a common ancestral form for each genus, in the one case fourbranched, and in the other case two-branched. On the other hand, it is comparatively easy to explain the more or less simultaneous existence of forms possessing the same number of stipes, but otherwise only distantly related, if they are imagined to be the result of the variation of a number of different ancestral types along similar lines. They allude to similar phenomena which have been shown to exist amongst other organisms; thus Mojsisovics has described analogous cases amongst the Ammonites, and Buckman (under the name of heterogenetic homoeomorphy) amongst the brachiopods, though in this instance the cases of 'species' and not of 'genera' are considered. Following the above inferences to their legitimate conclusion, the authors point out how 'genera' like Diplograptus and Monograptus may contain representatives of more than one 'family' of graptolites, according to the classification now in vogue, which would account for the great diversity in the characters of the monograptid hydrothecæ. In conclusion, the authors offer a few theoretical observations upon a possible reason for the changes which they have discussed in the paper. 7. Zonal Divisions of the Carboniferous System. By E. J. GARWOOD, M.A., F.G.S., and J. E. Marr, M.A., F.R.S. The authors call attention to previous attempts which have been made to divide the Carboniferous rocks into zones, noting the zonal divisions of the Lower Carboniferous rocks of North England, established by De Koninck and Lohest, and the view expressed by Waagen that fuller work will enable geologists to define a series of zones in the Carboniferous as in older and newer strata. The detailed work of one of the authors (Mr. Garwood) leads them to suppose that the following zones occur in the Lower Carboniferous beds of the northern part of the Pennine Chain and adjoining regions :- Mr. Garwood has traced the zone of Productus latissimus, occupying the same relative position to that of P. giganteus, from Settle, in Yorkshire, to the Northumbrian coast, near Howick Burn. The authors believe that brachiopods and goniatites will furnish good results, if a detailed study of their distribution is made; and they suggest that a Committee be appointed to inquire into the possibility of dividing the Carboniferous rocks into zones, to call the attention of local observers to the desirability of collecting fossils with this view, and, if possible, to retain the services of eminent specialists, to whom these fossils may be submitted. 8. Twelfth Report on Palæozoic Phyllopoda.-See Reports, p. 416. 9. Interim Report on the Eurypterid-bearing Deposits of the Pentland Hills. 10. On some Decapod Crustacea from the Cretaceous Formation of Vancouver's Island, &c. By HENRY WOODWARD, F.R.S. Through the kindness of Mr. J. F. Whiteaves, F.G.S., Palæontologist to the Geological Survey of Canada, I have lately received a series of Crustacea from Vancouver Island and Queen Charlotte Island, and as they offer a close affinity with forms from our Gault and Greensand, they seem deserving of special notice. The existence of Cretaceous beds in Canada has long been known, and the coalfields of Nanaimo and Comox, on Vancouver Island, have been correlated with the Cretaceous series, as well as those of Queen Charlotte Island, and that of Alberta eastward of the Rocky Mountains. The fossils were described by F. B. Meek in 1857, by Dr. B. F. Shumard in 1858, by Professor H. Y. Hind in 1859, Dr. Hector in 1861, Mr. W. Gabb in 1864. These are all descriptions of characteristic Cretaceous mollusca. Only two Crustacea are mentioned, namely, a decapod crustacean, provisionally named Hoploparia Dulmenensis, from the Niobara-Beaton group of Manitoba, and a longtailed decapod from the Pierre-Fox Hills, or Montana formation. These have not been seen by the present writer. The species now recorded comprise—— 1. Several examples of a small burrowing form of decapod-macrouran crustacean, belonging to the Callianasside, and common in the chalk of Maastricht and Faxoe, and the Greensand of Colin Glen, Belfast. The Vancouver Island form is named Cullianassa Whiteavesii. 2. The second is a form of brachyuran decapod, belonging to the family Corystide, and is represented by two imperfect carapaces, one of which shows the frontal portion well preserved, and is evidently closely related to the genera Eucorystes and Palæocorystes from the Greensand and Gault of England, and especially with Paleocorystes Broderipi, from the Gault of Folkestone. I propose to name this after the discoverer as Palæocorystes Harveyi. The specimens were obtained from the Cretaceous beds of Comox River, Vancouver Island. 3. This form is the most abundant of the crabs met with, and is nearly allied to Plagiophthalmus, but its exact position is somewhat doubtful. Mr. Harvey writes that he has found this small crab everywhere in the district of Vancouver's Island, where there are marine Cretaceous beds and fossils. I have named it (provisionally) Plagiophthalmus (?) vancouverensis. 4. The fourth specimen is a crab allied to the genus Homola, and is from Queen Charlotte Island, Skidegate Channel, west of Alliford Bay, and was obtained by Mr. J. Richardson. It may be compared with the genus Prosopon (von Meyer), from the Jurassic, with several forms from the Chalk of Faxoe, and with Homolopsis Edwardsii, from the Gault of Folkestone. I have named it (provisionally) Homolopsis (?) Richardsoni, after the discoverer. These crabs occur in concretionary nodules in the Cretaceous beds of Vancouver, and in black coarse nodules on the beach at Queen Charlotte Island, but they have not been removed far from the parent rock. It is interesting to notice the close approximation between these North-West American Cretaceous forms of Crustacea and those from the same horizon in Europe, and it seems to indicate that even so late as Cretaceous times the same marine fauna existed over a far wider area than it at present covers. This is true, also, of the abundant molluscan fauna occurring in the same series of beds over very widely separated areas of the North American continent, from Manitoba in the east to Vancouver in the west, many of the genera (and perhaps the species also) being found in our own Cretaceous beds. [Diagrams of the new forms were exhibited.] 11. Interim Report on the Registration of Type Specimens. 12. Twenty-third Report on Erratic Blocks.-See Reports, p. 430. SECTION D.-ZOOLOGY (INCLUDING ANIMAL PHYSIOLOGY). PRESIDENT OF THE SECTION-WILLIAM A. HERDMAN, D.Sc., F.R.S., F.R.S.E., F.L.S., Professor of Natural History in University College, Liverpool. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 12. The President delivered the following Address: : THIS year, for the first time in the history of the British Association, Section D meets without including in the range of its subject-matter the Science of Botany. Zoology now remains as the sole occupant of Section D-that 'Fourth Committee of Sciences,' as it was at first called, more than sixty years ago, when our subject was one of that group of biological sciences, the others being Botany, Physiology, and Anatomy. These allied sciences have successively left us. Like a prolific mother our Section has given rise one after another to the now independent Sections of Anthropology, Physiology, and Botany. Our subject-matter has been greatly restricted in scope, but it is still very wide-this year, when Section I devoted to the more special physiology of the medical physiologist does not meet, perhaps a little wider than it may be in other years, since we are on this occasion credited with the subject 'Animal Physiology-surely always an integral part of Zoology! It is to be hoped that this section will always retain that general and comparative physiology which is inseparable from the study of animal form and structure. The late Waynflete Professor of Physiology at Oxford, in his Newcastle Address to this Section, said that every appreciable difference in structure corresponds to a difference of function,' and his successor, the present Waynflete Professor, has shown us how pointless is structure apart from function, and how baseless and unstable is function apart from structure'-the 'argument for the simultaneous examination of both' in that science of Zoology which we profess is, to my mind, irresistible. 1 We include also in our subject-matter, besides the adult structure and the embryonic development of animals, their distribution both in space and time, the history and structure of extinct forms, speciography and classification, the study of the habits of animals and all that mass of lore and philosophy which has gathered around inquiries into instinct, breeding, and heredity. I trust that the discussion of matters connected with Evolution will always, to a large extent, remain with this Section D, which has witnessed in the past the addresses, papers, discussions, and triumphs of Darwin, Huxley, and Wallace. When the British Association last met in Ipswich, in 1851, Section D, under the Presidency of Professor Henslow, still included Zoology, Botany, and Physiology, and a glance through the volumes of reports for that and neighbouring years 1 Burdon-Sanderson-British Association Report for 1889. 2 Gotch-Presidential Address to Liverpool Biological Society, vol. i. 1894. |