William Pengelly

Abstract

PROF. BOYD DAWKINS, in his otherwise excellent obituary of Pengelly, refers to the Bovey Tracey beds as a Miocene Lake deposit. They are, however, not lacustrine but fluviatile, consisting of current-bedded coarse grits alternating with lignitic muds, such as are deposited in stretches of still water when the main current cuts itself a new channel. Lithologically these beds are identical with those of Corfe and Bournemouth, and there is no reason to doubt their being the deposits of one and the same river. Neither are they Miocene, if the evidence of fossils is to he trusted; and we have no other guides in this case but the lithology and palæontology, since the identifiable and most characteristic fossils are also found in the Middle Bagshots of Bournemouth, in a precisely similar matrix, and in the same state of preservation. In determining the age of the deposits, great stress was laid on the supposed identify of the Sequoia Couttsiœ of Bovey with that of the Hamstead beds; but by visiting Bovey not long since, and obtaining perfect specimens of the cones, I satisfied myself that the Bovey plant is a true Sequoia, with scales growing at right angles from the axis, and with compressed winged seeds; while even more perfect specimens from Hamstead, obtained soon after, showed the scales inserted at the base, and the seeds wingless, falling thus more properly into Athrotaxis. The foliage growth is also entirely different, though the leaves are similar. The point is of some importance, yet the mistake having been made by such “heroes of geology” as Heer and Pengelly, is extremely hard to eradicate.