No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2009
There are some points in Mr. Maw's article on the relative ages of the Boulder-clays which require notice from me, because they involve the consequence of assigning to the deposit which I have described under the name of “trail” an antiquity far higher than that which I believe to belong to it.
page 193 note 1 See Geological Magazine for March last, p. 97.Google Scholar
page 193 note 2 Read at the Geological Society, 9th January, 1867.Google Scholar
page 193 note 3 Journal, vol. xxii. p. 554, and Geological Magazine, vol, iii. p. 483.Google Scholar
page 195 note 1 Reader, 2nd December, 1865.Google Scholar
page 195 note 2 Elements, vol. i. p. 275, ed. 1867.Google Scholar
page 195 note 3 Phil. Mag., Aug. 1864, and Feb. 1867.Google Scholar
page 196 note 1 Geol. Jour., vol. viii. p. 68.Google Scholar
page 196 note 2 Phil. Mag. for Feb., 1867, p. 3.Google Scholar
page 197 note 1 Phil. Mag. Feb. 1867, p. 3.Google Scholar
page 197 note 2 Geol. Journal, vol. xxii. p. 564.Google Scholar
page 198 note 1 Geol. Journal, vol. xxii. p. 564.Google Scholar