File:The Quarterly journal of the Geological Society of London (13960618043).jpg

580

 ME. 
 G. 
 W. 
 LAHPLTTGH 
 ON 
 THE 
 

bed

 of 
 " 
 coprolites 
 " 
 be 
 considered 
 sufficient 
 proof. 
 I 
 think 
 there- 
 

fore

 that 
 the 
 statement 
 mentioned 
 with 
 some 
 degree 
 of 
 doubt 
 by 
 

Judd

 in 
 the 
 text 
 of 
 his 
 first 
 paper 
 *, 
 but 
 brought 
 more 
 prominently 
 

forward

 in 
 the 
 "Comparative 
 Table 
 " 
 of 
 a 
 later 
 paper 
 t, 
 whence 
 it 
 

has

 made 
 its 
 appearance 
 in 
 other 
 quarters 
 j, 
 should 
 be 
 set 
 aside 
 as 
 

against

 the 
 evidence. 
 

That

 the 
 Coprolite-bed 
 should 
 have 
 been 
 traced 
 by 
 Leckenby 
 so 
 

far

 north 
 as 
 Hunmanby 
 Gap 
 shows 
 that 
 the 
 average 
 dip 
 of 
 the 
 beds 
 

is

 not 
 great 
 — 
 not 
 perhaps 
 greater 
 than 
 that 
 of 
 the 
 chalk 
 — 
 and 
 that 
 

the

 breadth 
 of 
 the 
 outcrop 
 of 
 the 
 bituminous 
 shales 
 cannot 
 be 
 taken 
 

as

 evidence 
 of 
 their 
 thickness. 
 They 
 are 
 probably 
 repeated 
 over 
 

and

 over 
 again 
 in 
 the 
 contortions. 
 And 
 as 
 there 
 are 
 strong 
 reasons 
 

for

 believing 
 that 
 the 
 shales 
 seen 
 in 
 the 
 cliff 
 near 
 Filey, 
 which 
 have 
 

been

 supposed 
 to 
 represent 
 lower 
 beds 
 (" 
 Middle 
 Kimeridge 
 " 
 and, 
 

on

 the 
 shore, 
 " 
 Lower 
 Kimeridge 
 "), 
 are 
 not 
 in 
 place 
 §, 
 it 
 follows 
 that 
 

 Quart. 
 Journ. 
 Geol. 
 Soc. 
 vol. 
 xxiv. 
 p. 
 237. 
 

t

 Ibid. 
 vol. 
 xxvi. 
 p. 
 330.