At the Time When I Wrote the Paper on the Polyzoa and Foram- Nifera
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Downloaded from http://pygs.lyellcollection.org/ at University of Calgary on May 24, 2015 250 LUPTON : GOLD, SLATE, AND SALT MINES IN GREAT BRITAIN. MINERAL PRODUCE or THE UNITED KINGDOM, 1887.—Continued. I Weight i Value Tons. Iron Pyrites ... ... - 22,079 12,682 Jet ... ... ... ...ilbs. 1,448 289 Lead Ore 51,563 429,137 Lignite 1,764 793 Manganese Ore 13,777 11,110 Ochre, Umber, &c. 8,293 15,789 Oil, Shale 1,411,378 355,085 Petroleum 66 99 Phosphate of Lime ... 9,894 15,830 Salt (180,000 tons of Rock Salt) 2,193 951 732,320 Slates and Slabs 464,334 1,118,818 Stone, &c. 24,000,000* 8,609,600 Sulphur of Strontia ... 15,169 7,584 Tin Ore 14,189 878,831 Tungstate of Soda 1 24 Wolfram 54 1.269 Zinc Ore 25,445 76,182 Total value 206,043,905 55,326,164 * Tonnage estimated by author. FURTHER NOTES ON THE POLYZOA OF THE LOWER GREENSAND, AND THE UPPER GREENSAND OF CAMBRIDGE. PART II.* BY GEORGE ROBERT VINE. At the time when I wrote the paper on the Polyzoa and Foram- nifera of the Cambridge Greensand, very little information could be gleaned respecting Polyzoa from the horizons of the Gault, Chalk Marl, or Hunstanton Red Chalk, whilst from the horizon of the Cam• bridge Greensand no record of a Polyzoan fauna existed. Even as it is, much of our knowledge of the Cambridge Greensand Polyzoa is derived from the study of forms found attached to foreign bodies, or unattached (free) in the phosphate beds of Cambridge. As already stated in the first paper (p. 3), the fossils sent to me for examination and description, were the property of Mr. Thomas Jesson, P.G.S., so in the present case the additions to the fauna of the Cambridge horizons that I am now able to make, I owe to the same gentleman's careful scrutiny of his larger fossils, on which Polyzoan encrustations were found. In addition to these valuable collections, my own * Part i., Proc. Yorksh. Geol. Soc, Vol. ix., p.p. 1-16, 2 plates. Downloaded from http://pygs.lyellcollection.org/ at University of Calgary on May 24, 2015 VINE : POLYZOA OF THE LOWER AND UPPER GREENSAND. 251 cabinet has been gradually enriched by additions of Cretaceous Polyzoa from foreign horizons, so that now I am better able to appre• ciate the labours of Dr. Goldfuss, Hagenow, and D'Orbigny, whose delineations of Cretaceous Bryozoa deserve our highest admiration. The works of other students, such as Beissel, Reuss, Roomer, and Simonowitseh have also increased my knowledge of the varied forms of the wide-spread Polyzoa of the Cretaceous epoch. Since 1885, too, other students have been at work on this beautiful group, notably among the rest Dr. Pergens of Belgium, who, having had access to D'Orbigny's original collection, will be able to clear up many difficult problems respecting the minuter work, structural features, &c, of D'Orbigny. Besides this Dr. Pergens has been actively engaged on the correlation and distribution of Cretaceous Bryozoa in the 'Tufeau de Maestricht," " Limsten de Faxe," " Cretace de la Scanie," and the " Cretace de la Saxe et de la Boheme,"* and by the aid of these published lists the palaeontologist is now better able to study the ranges of the commoner forms of Cretaceous Polyzoa ; but, because there was no more recent list than that of Morris, British Lower Cre• taceous species have been, heretofore, only faintly dealt with. For the purpose of this and another paper, I have recently re-examined the collection of Upper and Lower Greensand Polyzoa in the School of Mines. Nearly the whole of these are named in the cretaceous catalogue of that Institution (1878), but in the synoptical table which will precede the descriptive matter I have endeavoured to re• arrange the species, as far as I am able, in accord with the Hincksian classification. This the student of Fossil Polyzoa will be ready to acknowledge is not always possible, for the simple reason that, though the arrangement of the Cheilostomata is to a large extent impregnable, the arrangement of the Cyclostomata has to be modified, enlarged or restricted, according to the age and the horizon of the fossils dealt with. Hence in re-arranging the generic names in the published lists of Morris, and the School of Mines Catalogue, I have made reference to the text and figures of D'Orbigny before doing so. In some few instances I have retained D'Orbigny's generic terms for special groups. * Sur l'age de la partie superieuse du "Tuffeau de Coply." Brussels, 1887. Downloaded from http://pygs.lyellcollection.org/ at University of Calgary on May 24, 2015 252 VINE : POLYZOA OP THE LOWER AND UPPER GREENSAND. In this paper, therefore, I shall confine myself to the Polyzoa of the Upper and Lower Greensands only. I do this for two reasons. The Polyzoa of the Gault, Lower Chalk, Red Chalk, and Upper Chalk must be separately dealt with, as new material is constantly coming to hand, and even the Polyzoa of Famugdon and Warminster would be all the better appreciated if rigidly overhauled. In dealing with the Cambridge Greensand species, now that fairly ample material has been placed in my hands, it will be more advantageous as a paloeonto- logical sketch to separately classify, especially in the synoptical table, the Polyzoa dealt with. In the first place many large and small fossils, belonging undoubtedly to the Greensand of Cambridge, are encrusted with colonies of Polyzoa, some of which are very fine. I have before me a list, twenty-four examples at least, sent by Mr. Jesson, and briefly referred to in my first paper (p. 3). These will now constitute true Cambridge Greensand species, and their tabula• tion will be altogether distinct. The second group of Polyzoa are derived probably from erosion or denudation of rocks of the ages of the Cambridge Greensand and Lower Chalk. In December, 1884, Mr. Jesson wrote me as follows respecting the derived forms. "As to the exact horizon of the Polyzoa from Cambridge I think it is quite impossible to say anything sufficiently accurate to be of any use. They come from the washings of the phosphate beds, but naturally in the excavations there is a great admixture of various horizons. I believe the material came from the Coldhams' Lane Pits." These remarks are all the more valuable, because, having picked from the fine sittings of this debris a goodly number of Foraminifera and Ento- mostraca;* belonging evidently to various cretaceous horizons, a note as to their source may prevent future misunderstanding. The Polyzoa derived from these washings will be tabulated under the head " Phosphate Beds." Sir Charles Lyellf places the Chloritic Series, or Upper Green• sand, at the base of the Chalk Marl, and above the Gault. This is the location of the " Cenomanien" division of the Cretaceous Beds by French authors. In his remarks on the series, Lyell says, " Accord- * See Part iii., further on. t Elements, p. 112 and 226, ed. 1878. Downloaded from http://pygs.lyellcollection.org/ at University of Calgary on May 24, 2015 VINE : POLYZOA OF THE LOWER AND UPPER GREENSAND. 253 ing to the old nomenclature this sub-division of the Chalk was called Upper Greensand in order to distinguish it from members of the Neocomien, or Lower Greensand Series below the Gault, to which the name of Greensand had been applied. Besides the reasons before given (265) for abandoning this nomenclature, it is objectionable in this instance as leading the uninitiated to suppose that the divisions thus named, Upper and Lower Greensand, are of co-ordinate value, instead of which the chloritic sand is quite a subordinate member of the Upper Cretaceous group ; and the term greensand has very com• monly been used for the whole of the Lower Cretaceous Rocks, which are almost comparable in importance to the entire Upper Cretaceous Series The phosphatic bed in the suburbs of Cambridge must have been formed partly by the denudation of pre-existing rocks of cretaceous age,"* Mr. A. J. Brownet also regards the Cambridge Greensand as the base of the Chalk Marl, it having been formed from the erosion of the Gault by marine currents. Where the Greensand Bed exists the true Upper Greensand is absent, and the Gault is incomplete, Mr. Browne also traces the beds through Cambridge, Bedfordshire, and Buckinghamshire, and shows that in passing from Cambridge S.W. the Upper Gault first appears near Barton, the true Upper Greensand near Tring. The most important factor in this paper, in a palgeonto- logical sense, is the list of fossils. These the author divides into two groups : 1st, Those proper to the deposit ; 2nd, Those derived from other horizons. The number of invertebrate species is 254, and 208 or 210 of these are said to be derived, consequently about 46 f species belong to the Cambridge chloritic deposit, whilst with the remainder their chief affinity is with those of the Upper Gault. These conclusions of the author are, so far, valuable, but the entire absence in the list of any reference to the probable existence of a Polyzoan fauna was perhaps unavoidable at the time, and as far as I * Ibid, pp. 282, 283. f Jour. Geol. Soc. vol. xxxi., p.p. 256, 816. X The lists of Mr. Browne, 1875 and 1881, differ in some few particulars, but as I am not making any special point of this difference, it will be far more satisfactory if the student will look at Mr.