I Am indebted to R. L. Jack, Esq., F.G.S., the Government Geologist of North Queensland, for permission to examine the remains of a Neuropterous wing (figured on Plate XI. Fig. 1), and which forms one of a collection of Cretaceous fossils transmitted by him to my colleague Mr. Robert Etheridge, jun., for description.

The molluscan fossils figured on Plate XI. were transmitted to the Editor by Mr. Hy. Y. Lyell Brown, F.G.S., Government Geologist for South Australia. They are from two localities in that Colony, one near Mount Hamilton, 20 miles S.W. of Lake Eyre, but the greater part came from 40 S.W. of the Peak. There is nothing in the collection which could be quoted as absolutely decisive of their age, though we may fairly regard them as Mesozoic. The conditions of fossilization remind us of the Jurassic fossils of this country, and the general facies is not dissimilar. But these resemblances should not be taken for more than they are worth, the more so since we fail to trace absolute specific identity.

Having, some time since, been favoured by Professor Ralph Tate, A.L.S., F.G.S., of the University of Adelaide, South Australia, with two fragments of Tribolites from the Parara Limestone, Yorke's Peninsula, I venture to place the same on record, and to add a few notes on their probable affinities

The first remains of Pterodactyls discovered in this country were found by the writer, in the autumn of 1870, near the Smoky Hill River, in Western Kansas. These belonged to a gigantic species, which was described by the writer in 1871, and is now known as Pteranodon occidentalis. The geological horizon of these fossils was in the Middle Cretaceous, in the same deposits that contain the Odontornithes, or Birds with teeth. In the following year, additional specimens were secured by the writer in the same region, and referred to two new species of the same genus

In the Geol. Mag. Dec. II. Vol. X. pp. 462–3, a Synopsis of the Genera of Fossil Phyllopoda was offered as a basis for the study of these interesting, though often obscure, little fossils, and some of the Bivalved forms, namely, Hymenocaris, Caryocaris, and Lingulocaris, were more especially noticed. See also “Report British Assoc.” for 1882. The univalve forms (excepting Dithyrocaris) have since then been carefully studied; and the classification proposed last year is found to hold good, with some slight modification, on comparison of all the species of which specimens or published figures have come to hand. Thus the term “flat-shield” is not strictly correct, for some of these carapaces are subconical or slightly convex; and one at least (Dipterocaris) is bent like a low ridge along the back: Pinnocaris is possibly really bivalved, without the triangular rostral piece; and probably Barrande's Crescentilla may be placed with Pterocaris and Dipterocaris.

The Entomostraca that form the subject of the following remarks are from the Carboniferous rocks of Nova Scotia, and were submitted to us for examination, at different times, by Principal Dr. J. W. Dawson, C.M.G., F.R.S., of McGill College, Montreal.

The occurrence of two Archæan groups in Shropshire is now well known to geologists. The chain of hills which strikes to the south-west from Lilleshall, north-east of Wellington, to the region south of Church-Stretton, is mainly composed of bedded volcanic rocks; but gneissic and granitoid types have been recognized at the Ercal and at Primrose Hill, the elevations forming the opposite extremities of the Wrekin, and a small exposure was detected near Hope Bowdler, east of Church-Stretton. A second axis of the old rocks, ranging parallel to the Wrekin chain, consists of volcanic ejecta and highly indurated grits, which are probably to be referred to the younger of the two Archæan groups hitherto recognized in the county. The relations between the volcanic and the gneissic systems is clearly defined by the Charlton Hill (see map) conglomerate (a band in the volcanic series), which contains numerous well-rounded pebbles of rock precisely similar to the granitoid gneiss of Primrose Hill. This fact implies a considerable break between the two groups.

In recent Numbers of the Geological Magazine has appeared a paper by the Rev. O. Fisher, “On Faults, Jointing, and Cleavage,” which, it seems to me, should not be left to stand unchallenged. It is one of those in which mathematical symbols are made to do duty for arguments. Some idea is started, a few W's and P's are scattered about, an equation is written down, it leads to nothing, and then the conclusion is triumphantly reached. Sometimes, however, there is no conclusion at all; but statements come in incidentally which will hereafter be quoted with the introduction “I have shown.” Surely there must be many geological birds too old to be caught by such chaff; but the “Magazine” is also for the nestlings. Such papers, too, are otherwise harmful, for the wideawake soon learn that credit may be gained by work unfinished, and speculations that are crude, and they are tempted so to seek it rather than by harder labour. So goes our science down and loses caste.