and are among the best and most wholesome waters for domestic supply in Great Britain.' After reading this, may we not say that Undermere, about which no one will quarrel, is the lake whence great towns in the north should draw their water supply? During the meeting of the British Association at Plymouth last August, the Mineralogical Society held their second annual gathering under the presidency of Mr Sorby, F.R.S., who in his address gave an account of a new method for determining the index of refraction of minerals, which can be readily employed in their identification. This seems a dry subject; but it is one likely to be valuable and interesting to mineralogists and chemists, and to lead to an entirely new branch of mineralogical study, and to the discovery of a new class of optical properties of crystals. For a proper understanding of the method, a knowledge of optics, of mathematics, and other branches of science would be necessary; but we may state generally that it is based on the fact, that if an object, when placed in focus for examination on the stage of a microscope, is covered with a plate of some highly refracting substance, the focal length is increased; in other words, the microscope must be raised a little farther from the object in order to restore the focus. The distance to which the microscope has been moved thus becomes a measure, which can be accurately determined on a scale to thousandths of an inch. By this measure, therefore, very minute differences of refraction can be determined, and the several minerals identified; and Mr Sorby, in conjunction with Professor Stokes, Sec. R.S., has arrived at certain definite conclusions, which, embodied in numerical tables, may ere long be consulted by all interested in the subject. On this point Mr Sorby explained in his address: 'On applying this method to the study of various minerals, the difference is found to be very great. We can mostly at once see whether they give a single unifocal image or one or two bifocal images, and form a very good opinion respecting the intensity of the double refraction, and easily determine whether it is positive or negative.... These facts combined furnish data so characteristic of the individual minerals, that it would usually be difficult to find two approximately similar.... It has been said that in studying the microscopical structure of rocks it is often difficult to distinguish nepheline from apatite. But the index of nepheline is about 1.53, whereas that of apatite is 1.64, and such a considerable difference could easily be recognised in a section not less than one-fiftieth of an inch in thickness.'