IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 1.25 UiiZA M2.S mm m22 1^ 12.0 u 1^ i - 6" ^ V] ^ Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WeST MAIN STRICT WEBSTiR.N.Y. 14S30 (716) S72-4S03 •1>^ v iV ;\ \ -r^ '^^;^^ -%«■ rij* CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CEHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. Coloured covers/ -J Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D D D D D D Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque r I Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relii avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serr^e peut causnr de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ 11 se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 fiimdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires; L'Institut 9 microf ilm6 le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lul a 4t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normaie de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ I — n Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/oi Pages restaur^es et/ou peliicul^es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcoior^es, tachetdes ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages d^tachdes Showthroughi Transparence Quality of prir Quality in6gale de I'impression Includes supplementary materii Comprend du materiel suppl6mentaire rri Pages detached/ r^ Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ D Seule Mition disoonible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totaiement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuille: d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 fiimdes A nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. Th to Th po of fill Or be thi sU ot fir si< or JY sh Ti wl M di er be rij re m This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X asx 30X y 12X 16X mn 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here hes been reproduced thanks to the generosity off: Librarv, Qaological Survey of Canada L'exemplaire ffilmA fut reproduit grAce k la gAnArositA de: Bibliothkiua, Comminion Gtologiaue du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and In keeping with the ffilming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or Illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the ffirst page with a printed or illustrated Impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper lefft hand corner, lefft to right and top to bottom, as many fframes as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les images suivantes ont M6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetA de l'exemplaire ffiimA. et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de ffilmage. Les exemplalres originaux dont la couverture en papier est Imprimte sont ffilmte en commengant par le premier plat e* en terminant suit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impresslon ou d'illustration. soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exempiairas uriginaux sont ffilmte en commandant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impresslon ou d'lilustration et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboies suivants apparaTtra sur la derniire Image de cheque microffiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ft^ signiffie "A SUIVRE ", le symbols y signiffie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre fflimAs A des taux de reduction diffff6rents. Loraque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est ffllmA A partir de i'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'Images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. 1 2 3 t 2 3 4 5 6 r»i^*^^ «^ ■M Single Copy Pamphlet Covers Photo Mount Leatherboard Cover Size 7" X 5" 8" X 6" 9 " X 6" 9V2"x 6I/2" X 7" X 8' X 8I/2" X 8 ' xlO' X 81/4" i3y2"xio" 14" X 8I/2" xlO" xll" xl2" xll" xl2" 10' 10' 11" 12" 12" 13" 14" 15" 16" 17" 18 Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity 1/2" 1" 1/2" 1" No. 4340 No. 4360 No. 4380 No. 4400 4341 4361 4381 4401 4342 4362 4382 4402 4343 4363 4383 4403 4344 4364 4384 4404 4345 4365 4385 4405 4346 4366 4386 4406 4347 4367 4387 4407 4348 4368 4388 4408 4349 4369 4389 4409 4350 4370 4390 4410 4351 4371 4391 4411 4352 4372 4392 4412 4353 4373 4393 4413 4354 4374 4394 4414 4355 4375 4395 4415 4356 4376 4396 4416 Also made in other cover sizes, capacities and bindings MacMILLAN OFFICE APPLIANCES COMPANY Westboro, Ont, Canada Manufacturers 0;' Office and Library Filing Supplies Loose Leaf Devices and Specialties »X,T^ JltCy^ iX^^AiL, AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION *s AND Ccn/ZA^ '1-SjU.CC NOMENCLATURE BY JULES MARCOU. CAMLRIDGE Massachusetts, 42 Garden Street. Printed for the author, By the Salem Fress, May, 1888. m :1 n vi mf AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE I BY JULES MARCOU. J ^>- CAMBRIDGE Massachusetts, 42 Garden Street. Printed for the author, By the S&lem Press, May, 1888. 1 ^ ^ I > I I * , I 3 1 . ; ; » » ) t I » ' » I S J I 1 9 » s t » 1 a » " ; 1 '<>.>i*4»-fc^j^^^'*.-s. I :V CONTENTS. I A I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. Introduction ' Primitive or Azoic series • Taconlc system ^ Order of discoveries and original researches on the Ta- conlc system ^^ Cumbrian or Champlaln system 23 Silurian system 24 Devonian system 25 Carboniferous system ...,.••• 26 Dyassic system 29 Trlassic system ^^ Jurassic system ^^ Cretaceous system *^ Lower Tertiary system *^ Upper Tertiary or Helvetian system 52 Quaternary and Recent, or Modern series ... 63 Glacial epoch ^^ Living glaciers ^^ Explanation of the tabular view of American classification and nomenclature ^^ Synchronism and Homotaxls 61 The Geological map of Europe 64 Conclusion ®' Tabular view of American classification and nomenclature 72 '.,: v*,'.-*i..S|«N^.*)lF:>tf(«.t AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. I. iNTilODUCTrOK. Thk movement in fiivor of the uniformity of nomenclature, started by tlie International Geological Congress, althougli prema- ture, calls for some remarks on the actual standing of American classiflcations. I shall confine myself to stratigraphy and the history of American nomenclature ; the eruptive rocks being left apart. Classification and nomenclature are necessities of tlie first order, and require of those attending to them knowledge and practical experience of rare and very difflcult attainment. Mistakes are sure to result inevitably to all persons not well acquainted with all the different sides of the question, and errors are always at- tended with loss of time and loss of confidence ; for, without an exact chronological order of all the strata, geology falls back into an inextricable labyrinth, a mass of incoherent and undigestiblo facts put together at haphazard. Nothing is so much wanted and so diflicult to establish as a good classification, and the u:j of a cosmopolitan nomenclature acceptable, easily accessible and un- derstood by all geologists. In America the progress of nomenclature has been very steady although slow, being much embarrassed by interested persons, who have assumed to dictate authoritatively what they thought were the chronology and divisions of American stratigraphy ; retarding for years, by all the means at their disposal, the acceptance of obser- vations and classifications made by geologists better qualified and trained. A summary of the discoveries and the opposition made to their acceptance is necessary. II. Primitive oh Azoic Skries. The study of the crystalline rocks in Europe does not lead one to classify them into stratigraphical systems with geographical names, notwithstanding the attempt of Dr. Hicks for the British (6) AMERICAN OROLOOICAL islands (Lcwisian, Diinctiftn, Arvoninn nnd Pchidian) ; nnd in Atncricn uttoinpts of tliiH i^ind do not npponi' to Imvo been at* tended by bottcr results, altiioiigli several cfTorts have been niado to divide tliese roclts into ten or twelve Hystcms only for Canada, Lake Snpcrior and Now England. Tlic following names have i)cen proposed and nsod to some extent, although no one lias over been able to see and give, with any degree of aceuracy, the exact limits of each system, nor to be perfectly satisfied even as to their super- positions and successions .■ Laurentian, Iluronian, Terranovan, Montalban, Norian or Lal)radorian, Taconian or Itacolumltic, Ani- niiku (Animikic) series, Coatchiching, Ogishke, Vermillion scries, Keewatin (Kewatin) and Keweenawan.' Not one of these sys- tems, except the Kewcenawan, contains fossils ; notwithstanding the attempt made to record a lithological specimen as the remains of immense living sponges, called Eozoon Canadenae. Until now the geological survey of Canada, which seems to be the leader in classifying the primitive rocks into numerous sys- tems, has failed to recognize and name with any degree of accuracy the ditlerent rocks. For instance, the chemist and mineralogist, Mr. T. Sterry Hunt, is responsible for such extraordinary confusion as to "till the quartzites of Montmorency Fall near Quebec, gneiss! The en xtic quartzites and quartz of No. 1 on the road between Pointe Levis and Notre Dame are named limestone conglomerate! and the sandstone lenticular mass marked 4* on the same '^Plan of Pointe Levis," published in 1862 by the Canadian survey, is re- corded as a magnesian limestone ! With such lithological errors — which can be easily controlled by every geologist who visits Quebec — it is superfluous to discuss classifications. The lithology of Canada needs, not only a care- ful revision, but a complete recasting, before attempting anything in the way of nomenclature. What is needed in America are minute lithological studies made b}' able observers conversant with Comparative Lithology, not only among American rocks, but also with European crystalline rocks ; and also good and detailed surveys in the field. The introduction of the name ^j'c/zccan requires some explanation. 'The copper-bearing nielnpliyrs nnd conglomerntes, conetitntlng the main part of tlie KeweeiiHwaii, are not priniilivc roirks; nnd the wliole Byrtcni, as dellned by Mr. U. D. Irving, is much younger. Tlie melaphyrs contain Orthoceraa, like the diabase of Bo- hemia. mm CLASSIFICATION AND NOHBNCLATCRB. 7 First used by Mr. J. D. Dana in 1863, Manual ofOeolngtf, p. 583, to (iesigniite tlio "Hronzo or Arciuiic period" of tlio Preliistoric or *'Ago of ninn," it was not generally accepted. Mr. Dana, wanting to keep the name in geology, had the singular origiiuil idea of plac- ing it at the bottom instead of the top of the column of classificu- tlon, — a backward jump of the whole stratigra[>hic scale and index, clianging only Archaic period into Archcean system. Archaios, old, ancient, ap[)lies to the whole of geological science, and not to a partic dar epoch ; and it can be used only in a general wa}'. Otherwise, if employed for a group or system of rocks, it cre- ates confusion in regard to fossils such as : Archuiopterix, Archceo- cidaris, Archivocyathiis, Arclumoniacus^ etc., which exist in strata and systeujs nuich younger than the so-called Archiean system. For instance we have the Archaic period (Prehistoric), Archaean systeuj (Pre-Taconic) on tlie one hand, and Archuioptarix^ Archce- ocidoris, Archceocyathus, ArcIuronisctiSj etc., fossils, not one of whicli is to be found in either the Arcluic or the Archujan. Ar- chtean is one of those useless and cumbersome names which may well be dispensed wilh. The terms Primitive, Crystalline and Azoic series of rocks arc far better and stifllce amply for all demands. . III. Taconic System. I The greatest error made during the last fifty years is the stub- born and inconceivable opposition to the existence of the Taconic system. Too many persons have been involved in the contro- versy and are, even now, interested in either suppressing it totally, or at least partially, not to expect all sorts of objections, oppo- sitions and even trivial dissertations. Billings in a paper, "Remarks on the Taconic controversy," Ca- nadian Naturalist, April and July, 1872, has the courage to point out "the constant and utmost opposition of Messrs. James Plall and T. Sterry Hunt."^ 1 shall add several other names: Messrs. >At the meeting of the IiUcrnntional Geoloj,iciil CongroRB at Derlin, in 1885, Jir. James Hall Juined McsHrs. A. Gcikic and T, M. lluglics, in order to ))revcnt the voting on thoGonclUMions presented by Prof. G. Dcwalijue, Secretary of the Commission on the uniforniity of nomenclature, which was entirely favorable to the Taconic system. The postponement until the meeting in London, In 1888, of the subject of divisions of the second order for the Lower Paioiozoic series, on the ground that it "was mainly an English question," was a manwuvru on the part of those opposed to rendering Jus- tice to the Just claim of American geology. Those wlio succeeded in withdrawing Professor Dewalqne's proposition have in view the interest of £ni,Ush geologists; I'oping to have, at the Loudon meeting, a nia- ./ 8 AMERICAN OKOLOaiCAL Cl^:^ A^ . ^ . W'\Xf*At^ W. E. Logan, James D. Dana, the two Professors Rogers^ and - C. H. Hitchcock. The part taken by these lio vcn united adver-/g*^ IjL- saries of the Taconic system is inexcusable, and even odious. ^ Incapacity in fleUl stratigraphy and lack of practical knowledge of geology and palceontology on an unprecedented magnitude have never shown a bolder front. From the beginning, the paUeontologist of the state of New York, Mr. James Hall, has been at fault, ignoring the primordial fauna, its value, its true position in stratigraph}', even fifteen years after it had been stated in 1346 by Joachim Barrande ; and rejecting the good observations and determinations of Dr. Emmons, when it was he, Hall, who was faulty and incorrect. The ignorance displayed by all the opponents is startling, and can only be compared with their arrogance and their malicious acts. A few examples will suffice. 1. Disappearance of three thousand copies of the AgricuUtiral and Oeolngical Map of the state of New York, by Dr. Enmions, 1844, a large map, in four sheets, showing the extent of the Ta- conic system in New York, Massachusetts .";;•; Vermont. 2. The specimens, illustrating the Taconic system collected and arranged by Dr. Emmons in the State Museum of Natural History at Albany, all taken out, on an ex parte statement made by Mr. James Hall. 3. At the meeting of the American Association for the Ad- vancement of Science, at Alban3\ in 1851, William B. Rogers said in the geological section : "that as for the Taconic system, it joiity nminly composed of Englishmen, who will control the decisions and votes of the Congress, and iiccept the proposition arrived at — if any compromise can be made — be* tweon tlie imrtisansof Sedgwic-k and tliose of Murchlson. jv. preliminary meeting of tlio Commission of nonienclntiire was held lately — Ang. 30 to Sept. 6, 1887— at Manchester (England), in which a Canailian chemist, Mr. Sterry Htint, reprcsent'iig "the united opposition of Dr. Emmons' contemporaries,"— just as Mr. J. Hall at the Uerlin Congress — prevented onco more the question of priority, and our just claim from being properly considered. In the Compte-rendu de$ st'nnces (i Manthester, Hologne, 1887, we read at page 10: "M. G. Dewalque at^ks Mr. Sterry Hunt, if it Is not riglit to consider the name Taconic which can be appMcd to one of the three systems in discussion, and which presents the ad- vantoge of giving a place to American Ocology." Mr. Sterry Hunt answers "that tlie Lower Taconic is Archn?an, and the UpperTaconic is Cambrian. Historically, the last name has superiority over the llrst. licsides, ho does not believe tliat the Amerioaa geologists claim its maintenance." With two such rcpiescntativcs before the International Commission of Nomenclature, the American interest has |t"oat danger of being jeopardized, and not properly ac- knowlcilged or defended. (See also: On the use of the name 7'ii;';o»»ic by Jules Marcou in Proceed. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. xxni, pp. 347, 348, March 2, 1887), .li. J CLASSiriOATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 9 is dead! dead I ! dead! 1 1 with a significant pointing of his finger to Dr. Eirmons."' 4. Mr. James D. Dana refused to publisii Dr. Emmons' "re- marks upon Logan's Report wlien he announced liis Iluronian system, tliough tliey were courteous in tlie extreme. "* Emmons claimed thattiie Iluronian was only a part of his Taconic syb.om. 5. It was with the greatest difficulty that I was al)le to publisii the letters of Barrande, being aslied repeatedly by friends of Lo- gan and Hall not to put them in print. But even more. A very short resume of my communication to the Boston Society of Natural History, October 17, 1860, made by the Secretary, was considered by the "Publishing Committee" as sufficient, although the letters are only mentioned without any ex- tracts whatever ; and it required the powerful intervention of L. Agassiz, in order to have my paper published in full {Proceed. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. vii, p. 357 and p. 3G9, Boston, 1861). As soon as published, the Barrande letters were taken posses- sion of by the editors of the Amei'ican Journal of /Science, of the Canadian Naturalist and of the Report on the Oeology of Vermont ^ under an altered and false title ; and, because I signalized that un- scrupulous and mean act, I stand as the only fellow of the Boston Society of Natural Ilistorj' who has ever been publicly censured. It is at the end of vol. viii of the Proceedings where, in the Er- rata, p. 310, the " Publishing Committee " point out my footnote on page 240, in severe and unjust terms, in order to please Mr. J. D. Dana, who. after altering and falsifying the title of my paper, was bold enough to ask an investigation against me. A "Special Com- mittee" was appointed, and its report exculpated me from all blame and refused the censure called for by Dana, and nevertheless, passing over the report of the "Special Conunitt-:?e," I have been censured by the " Publishing Committee," for having maintained the integrity and exactness of the title used in the P-oceedings, and for defending my property. After that most unjust blame against a fellow member, I did not withdraw from the society, but it pre- vented me for twenty-five years from continuing my reading of geological papers before it; and I have been ol»liged, in order to publish my observations on American geology, to tlo it either at Un a letter of T>r. Emmons to J. Marcou, dntod 29 Hoc, I860, |>ai-tly publiBlied in The Taconic $yttvm nnil its position, etc., p. 188, eiinibrUlgu, 1886, "The Biime letter iind paper. 10 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL riti my own expense in Cambridge, or to liave recourse to foreign pe- riodicals in France and in Germany. It is always disagreeable and even detestable to be obliged to speak of one's self; but it is unfortunately for me, the only way to maintain my discoveries and observations, which are constantly attacked or passed over silently by almost all those studying the same subjects. In other sciences, such as chemistry, physics, as- tronomy, zoology, physiology, botany, etc., it is always easy to con- trol new facts and discoveries, by repeating carefully the obser- vations in laboratories. It is not so in practical geology ; for the laboratories are the whole surface of the earth, and you must go on each spot to see for yourself. But, besides, many geologists when in the field do not know how to observe, or are able only to observe a small portion of the phenomena spread before their eyes, neglect- ing most important points, and drawing false conclusions. A very easy and frequent way to impose and ventilate geological er- rors, is to say, "it appeared at the time to be the generally ac- cepted opinion" (J. D. Dana's American Journ. Sci., third scries, vol. xxxui, p. 416, 1887), when too often those who say so have done all in their power to impose and maintain the errors they are lamenting, trying as best they could to extricate themselves from their false position, It is much more easy to prevent, the truth being accepted in ge- ology, by the ver}' nature of practical observations in the field, Ihan in any other science, and the facility of maintaining errors is constantly made use of by all interested parties. But, even in geology, errors must come to an end. Forty or fifty years, if great for the life of an observer, are little in the history of progress. Truth is sure to have the upper hand ; and there is noth- ing else to do for the original discoverers and honest and exact observers, but to maintain sternly and without flagging their views, opinions and discoveries, against all opposition, obstruction, denial, or studied silence. This is my excuse for speaking of myself so often in this me- moir, having no choice, and being unwilling to lose observations made during forty years of my life, and often under extremely difficult, even perilous, circumstances. I am the first geologist WHO has made a geological section from the Mississippi river to t iC Pacific shores, determining and naming carefully all the dif- ferent systems of rocks existing in half the continent of North CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 11 America (1853-1854) ; and I have defended the Taconic system, single-handed almost, during twenty-seven years (1860-1887) ; two practical geological facts, which it will be most unjust to blot out of my record as an American geologist. 6. The geological survey of Canada not only did not help me in any way, when I went there in 1861, '62 and '63, to investigate the Taconic rocks, on the pressing invitation of one member of the survey ; but, on the contrary, an assistant of the survey was sent after me, to see and report my doings in the vicinity of Quebec, to the director Logan. 7. Mr. James D. Dana has given a "List of papers on the Ta- conic system" (Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xix, Feb., 1880, p. 153) partial and most incomplete, from which he has excluded almost all my papers on the subject, as well as all those of Barrande and Perry. Mr. Dana pretends to make a classification of those ad- verse to and of those in favor of the Pre-Silurian (Pre-Potsdam) age of the Taconic system ; but he has associated with Dr. Em- mons and Mr. Marcou, in the second division, three of the most constant and bitter opponents of the Taconic. And, finally, in accordance with his usual practice of giving credit to those to whom it does not belong, Mr. Dana pretends that the Lower Silurian is called Champlain division by Mather, when it is an unquestionable fact that Dr. Emmons is the originator of the Champlain group. Order of discoveries and original researches on the Taconic system. 1809. Macijre in his first geological map of the United States colors as "Transition rocks" the eastern side of the Hudson river from Hudson city towards Poughkeepsie. By transition rocks, he means limestone, greywacke, flinty slates and trap. 1817-18. Maclure in his second geological map colors as "Tran- sition rocks" all the eastern band, extending from the Canada line down the eastern shore of Lake Champlain, through Vermont, east- ern New York, western Massachusetts to Tappan sea in tlie Hudson river ; a quite accurate geographical distribution of the Taconic system, and very similar to the band colored as Taconic in the Agricultural and Geological map of Neiv Yorky by Dr. Emmons, 1844. 1819. C. Devey gives a sketch of the mineralogy of the Ta- conic range, near Williams College. 12 AMERICAN OEOLOOICAL 1824. C. Devey with the assistance of his pupil Dr. E. Einmons publishes A Geological map of the county of Berkshire ^ Mdss.^ and of a small part of the adjoining states; with a sl^etch of the geology and mineralogy, — a first attempt to systematize and classify the rocks of the Taconic region. 181&-24-28-32. A. Eaton, in four different publications, gives sections, classifications and arrangements of the rocks of the vi- cinity of Williams College and the Taconic range, which are rather confused and certainly without any piogress, on what was already known. Like Macluie and Dek^ey, be refers a part of the rocks of the Taconic area to ll?e Primit've und Transition rocks ; and the discovery by Vanuxem in 1829, that all the New York strata belong to the Transition series, was not accepted by Eaton, except for the Calciferous sandrock, and the Trenton called " shell limerock at Trenton Falis" of the Calcarious (sic) formation; all the rest from the Utica slates included were referred by him to the secondary rocks. Whatever may have been Eaton's success as a teacher and a col- lector of specimens, he was certainly not a classificator, and his nomenclatures of 1818-24-28-32 are all of doubtful value and of little consequence in comparison with Devey's geological map of Berkshire of 1824. 1829. L. Vanuxem discovered, during 1827 and 1828, that all the secondary rocks of Maclure, Cleaveland and Eaton, in the states of New York, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia, were Transition rocks, and of a "greater geological antiquity" than admitted until then (Amer. Journ. Sci.^ vol. xvi, 254). It was the first great step, towards rational classification and a good nomenclature of the American paleeozoic rocks. 1838-42. Dr. E. Emmons discovers, below the Potsdam sand- stone, the great Taconic system. 1840-43. W. W. Mather originates the Hudson river group in which he places all the slates west and east of the valley of the Hudson, synchronizing it with the Frankfort group and Pulaski shales. He declares that, in the valley of the Hudson, the strata are "confusion worse confounded ;" and that the breaks or frac- tures "have deranged all the rocks of the Champlain division and packed them together, helter-skelter, in the utmost confusion." He describes the Taconic system of Dr. Emmons, as confined to the rocks forming the Williamstown mountain range, and he thinks that they "blend into the Champlain division on the one hand, and into the primary rocks on the other." As a conclusion, Mather mm CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 18 considers "the Taconic rocks are the same in ages as those of the Champlain division, modified in character b3' metamorphic agency." 1844. Dr. Emmons publishes his Taeonic system, with cliarac- teristic and special fossils. It contains the first discovery and de- scription of the Primordial fauna 1 all the world over, a discovery proved and advocated by Barrande, and which the adversaries ot Emmons are trying — even now (March 1888 in Amer. Joum. Sci) — to blot out from the record of American geology, and to replace by that part of the Cambrian system in which Sedgwick did not find a fauna, and about whose true sequence and exact strati- graphical divisions he knows almost nothing. 1846. Dr. Emmons reproduces his Taconic system in Agricul- ture of New York, with an appendix and a geological map show- ing for ilie first time, the band of Taconic rocks from Canada to New Jersey. The map — three thousand copies — was suppressed by interested parties, and was not issued until about 1877, when some m'.^^ilatcd copies were distributed by the state librarian at Albany. Finally, in 1887, the map, as dressed and colored by Em- mons with the full title, has at last come out. 1847. Mr. James Hall, in Paleontology of New York, vol. i, p. 319, does not recognize the Primordial fauna and ignores the posi- tion of the rocks of the Taconic system, which he thinks are clearly Hudson river group acted upon by gradual metamorphism. He says that the fossils described by Dr. Emmons are 'Hine- quivocally" identical with well-known species in the Hudson river group (upper part of the second fauna) ; regarding the Atopa tri- lineatus as "unquestionably" the Calymene Beckii of the Utica slates, one of the grossest errors ever made by a palseontologist ; and that the Elliptocephalus asaphoides belongs to a Lower Silu- rian (second fauna) type, closely related to the genus Oxigia or Asaphus, another great palaeontological mistake. 1866-69-60. Dr. Emmons continues to describe the Taconic system, adding new fossils to the primordial fauna of America, and synchronizing it, in 1860, with the Bohemian primordial zone of Joachim Barrande. 1868. In an article entitled : "Trilobites of the shales of the Hudson river group," Mr James Hall describes three trilobites of Georgia, as Hudson river group fossils, ignoring their primordial characteristics, and the meaning of palaeontological laws, as re- vealed in the primordial zone of Bohemia and Scandinavia. 14 AMERICAN OROLOOICAL It is in this small paper, printed under four different titles, in less than three years, that Mr. Hall, in order to strengthen his opinion that the Georgia trilobitic beds should be placed in the up- per part of the Cliamplain system, far above the Trenton groups, and also to cover his error as to tlie true position of the primor- dial fauha, w.ote his celebrated authoritative phrase, now legen- dary among American geologists : '* It would be quite superfluous for me to add one word in support of the opinion of the most able stratigraphical geologist (William E, Logan) of the American con- tinent." I860. Mr. Jules Marcou uses the name Taconic, in a commu- nication before the Boston Society of Natural History, reading three letters of J. Barrande addressed to him, on the primor- dial characters of the Braintree, Georgia and Pointe-L6vis trilo- bites, and stating that the Taconic system, misunderstood until then by the adversaries of Emmons, must take its place and its riglit usurped by the Hudson river group and a sort of metamor- phic Charaplain division, extending even so far up, according to Messrs. Hall and Hitchcock, as to include the Upper Silurian, the Devonian and even the Carboniferous, a certainly very rich and grand solid series of metamorphosed strata. It was the first ray of light in favoi' of Dr. Emmons and his Taconic system. Unhappily, it was also the last ; for that persecuted and ablest of all the Amer- ican geologists was shortly after shut up in North Carolina by the civil war of 1861, where he died in 1863 without knowing the other efforts made by Barrande, Billings and Marcou. My communication of the letters of Barrande, with my remarks on the Taconic rocks of the vicinity of Quebec, beforfe the Bos- ton Society of Natural History, Oct. 18, 1860, was like a thunder- bolt in a clear sky. Its first result was the immediate stopping of the printing of three large works : first, the third volume of the "Palseontology of New York" by James Hall, the introduction of which was already heralded in the Amer. Journ. Sci.^ Jan. 1861, p. 125, as handling, "with masterly skill the difficult subjects con- nected with the proper classification of the lower horizons of life in our planet ;" second, the "Geology of Vermont ;" and third, the Geology of Canada ;" besides the issue of the geological map of Vermont and the geological map of Canada ; the publication of those five geological and palaeontological works was at once inter- rupted, as soon as my paper had been issued at the end of Decern- CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 15 ber, 1860, and many chanjres, alterations and addiMons were nif.de. The introduction of the third volume of the "Paloeontology of New Yorlc" was entirely recast, with " the proper classification of the lower horizons of life on our planet " prudently left entirely out. However, all the changes and alterations in those five publications, all made in order to explain or cover, as far as practicable, the pre- cedent mistakes, are all erroneous and it is merely a change from Charybdis to Scylla. 1861. M. Joachim Barrande, in a very remarkable memoir, published in Paris, recognizes, in the Taconic system, his own Pri- mordial fauna and zone, and declares openly and positively that Dr. Emmons has the priority in the discovery of the Primordial fauna. He does not hesitate to regard the determination of the Taconic fossils by Mr. J. Hall as erroneous, and his conclusion in regard to stratigraphy as a great mistake. 1861-86. Mr, Jules Marcou, during a quarter of a century in ten memoirs published in America and in Europe, maintains the "Taconic system," adding to it the Potsdam sasidstone as its upper- most division. He advocates the accuracy of the Taconic system not only in the main but in most of the details, as it was propounded by its founder. Dr. Emmons. In his memoir of Dec. 10, 1884, "The Taconic system and its po- sition in stral'graphic geology" {Proceed. Amer. Acad. Arts and Sci- ences, vol. xii, p. 174, Cambridge, 1885), Mr. Marcou gives, on p. 221, a vertical and general section of the Taconic system, with a tabular view, p. 224, showing, for the first time, the division of the Taconic series into three systems, each one characterized by a spe- cial fauna ; first, the Infra- Primordial fauna, containing all the fossiliferous strata below the horizon of the Paradoxides or Lower Taconic ; second, the true Primordial fauna as characterized by Barrande with its zone of Paradoxides and Olenellus, or Middle Taconic ; and third, the Upper Taconic or Supra- Primordial fauna or zone of the Dikelocephalus, containing primordial types united with types whose great development takes place in the second fauna or Champlain system. 1863-82. In 1862, Mr. C. Fred Hartt, of New Brunswick, came as a student at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, and was placed by Agassiz under my direction. During 1863, Hartt showed me fossils collected round St. John, by Messrs. C. R. and G. F. Matthew. I referred them at once to the Primordial fauna, telling Hartt that they were analogous to the fossils of the Georgia ,.— ^ v.„„,4twMpME< 16 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL slates ; and I put into his Imnds specimens of the Primordial fauna collected by me, in 1861 and 1862 at Georgia and Swanton, Ver- mont, and at Pointe L6vis, Canada ; showing him also the identity of the forms of the American, Bohemian and Scandinavian primor- dial fossils. Hartt published a "Preliminary notice of a fauna of the Primor- dial Period in the vicinity of St. John, N. B." in ^^Observations on the Geology of Southern New Brunswick, by L. W. Bailey, pp. 30 and 31, Fredericton, 1865, in which he says distinctly that the fauna of the vicinity of St. John is of the Primordial period, ac- knowledging the kindness of Professor Agassiz, and his sugges- tions and help. My name is not quoted, because it was the custom, by courtesy, to refer everything which passed in the Museum to its founder and director, Louis Agassiz. Although well acquainted with the controversy I was tlien car- rying on in favor of the Taconic system, Hartt and Bailey used only the names Silurian and Quebec group, according to the view of the Director of the Geological Survey of Canada, W. E. Logan. Hartt did not publish tlie primordial fossils collected by Messrs. Matthew, Bailey and himself until 1868, when they appeared as a part ot Acadian Geology, second edition, by J. W. Dawson, at pp. 643 to 657, London. They are referred to the Lower Silurian of Murchison, without any notice whatever of the Taconic system. But more, Mr. Dawson says : 'These beds (meaning the series at St. John) are in the highest degree important in a geological point of view, as their fossils establish for the Jirst time on the American continent a series of fossiliferous beds older than the Potsdam sandstone, hitherto supposed by American geologists to be our oldest Palaeozoic group, etc." (Acadian Geology, p. 638). And further on he adds : "This formation has as yet {sic) been known as the St. John group; but I think this name unsuitable, . . . and would therefore propose . . . the name Acadian Group, by which I hope it will be known to geologists in whatever part of America it may be recognised." In the third edition of his work, London, 1878, Mr. Dawson repeats the same inaccurate statement, changing only the name Lower Silurian into "Middle or Lower Cambrian, known in Eng- land as the Menevian :" and using the expression "Acadian se- ries" of St. John, instead of "Acadian group." It is impossible to excuse such omissions and statements on the part of Mr. Dawson, who, in 1868, and even in 1878, pretended to CLASSIFICATION AND NOMKNCLATURE. 17 ignore and pass over all the o))8ei'vations and publications of Dr. Emmons on fossiliferous beds older than tlio Potsdam sandstone, all the remarks and conclusions or Barrunde,and all my researches on the Taconlc and the Primordial fauna in America. To Messrs. C. R. and G. F. Matthew is due the discovery of the Taconic fauna at Portland in the city of St. John (New Bruns- wick) in 1862, and to Mr.G. F. Matthew are due the excellent and numerous descriptions of all the fossils and sections, showing that at or near St. John the Taconic system is well developed and com- plete with its three faunas, the Primordial, the Infra-Primordial, and the Supra-Priraordi' . The name "St. John group," applied to the division of the third order which contains only the Primordial fauna, was first given by Hartt in 1865 ; and ever since Mr. G. F. Matthew has always used it, with the same meaning (see Illustrations of the fauna of the St. John group, 1882, etc.). It had priority over "Acadian group" proposed only three years later, in 1868, by Mr. Dawson, who simply transferred the historical names of "Acadian" and "Acadia" into geology in imitation of Murchison's "Silurian" and "Siluria," without even giving any observations of his own on the stratigraphy or palaeontology of the vicinity of St. John. Mr. Matthew has not used yet the name Taconic, calling Cam- brian all the strata round St. John. By Cambrian, he dues not mean the true Cambrian of Sedgwick, containing a fauna, but only that part in which Sedgwick did not find a single fossil. 1880. Mr. S. "W. Ford acknowledges Dr. Emmons' "great ser- vice," in opposing the Hudson river group doctrine, and admits his "signally good work ;" but says, that his favorite system (the Taconic) is a failure — certainly a very strange and rather para- doxical way of recognizing his good work and great service. 1886-87. Mr. C. D. Walcott says : "Dr. Emmons deserves great credit for the work that he did." But misled by the erroneous no- tion constantly and perversely put forward and maintained by Mr. Dana, that the Taconic area, as originated by Emmons, is of Lower Silurian age, he regrets not to apply the name Taconic to the formation of the Georgia horizon, using instead the name Mid- dle Cambrian. In doing this Mr. Walcott does not mean to syn- chronize the Georgia formation with the Middle Cambrian (Tre- madoc slates and Lingula flags of Wales — Sedgwick), creating a new confusion almost unconsciously ; but only meaning a Middle 2 ' 18 AMERICAN aXOLOOIOAL Cambrian according to his view, which limits tlie Cambrian to only one system, tlie Primordial fauna of Biirrande, an interpretation entirely ditTerent and opposite to Sedgwiclc's classiflcation. Soon after, however, Mr. Walcott has the advantage to recognize that the original Taconic area is formed of rocks of the Primordial zone, as well as tlie upper Taconic of Washington county ; and in two papers read in January and April 1887, at Washington, before sci- entiflc societies, he accepts tlie '^Taconic system" in the ixiain, and uses the name as the title of his two memoirs.^ 1888. (March 31). — As predicted in my foot-note the adversa- ries of the Taconic system have just begun a new attack. Led or more properly misled by Mr. James D. Dana, Mr. Walcott is trac- ing back his steps, and appears now for the second and even third time as a strong opponent of Dr. Emmons, and against the just claim of American geology for the priority of the discovery of the Primordial fauna and the strata containing it, in the general clas- siflcation and nomenclature of the world. I have expected it, and was sure that the erroneous opinions expressed during the last forty-five years, were to be defended and clung to with the greatest obstinacy ; and that after obtaining with more than ordinary diffi- culty the acknowledgment of the existence and true geological po- Bition of the Primordial fauna, every effort would be made to reduce that ungracefully granted concession to its smallest com- pass ixx the typical Taconic area. Mr. Walcott says : "Professor Marcou . . . has written at length upon the Taconic system, but I have been unable to discover that he has made any field observations in the typical Taconic area" X"The Taconic system of Emmons and the use of the name Taconic in geologic nomenclature ;" Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xxxv, p. 229, March, 1888). I have never claimed, that I made original researches in the Taconic range, nor intimated in any way that I was ever there. In January, 1861, Dr. P2mmons wrote me, that in the spring or summer, he. Colonel Jewett, and myself, would go >The adversaries of Dr. Emmons' Taconic system now admit two-thirds of it; but there still remain nnaccepted the "Blacic slutes," the Stockbridge marble and the Sparry limestone, besides the limestone and slates of Pointe L^vis, Phlilipsbnrgh, FortCassin, Shoreham, and Wappinger Valley. It is to be expected that the strongest opposition will be made to placing the Upper Taconic, composed of the L^vis and Philiipsburgh groupi and the Swanton and Citadclle Hill of Quebec group in the Primordial fauna as the supra-primordial or zone of the Dikelocephalus ana Iiathyuru$, and that Messrs. Hall, Dana and their followers will contest that pas t of the Taconio with the tenacity of despair. * CLASBtFICATION AND NOMRNCLATURB. 19 together over liis original ground and study the Taconio area. But Emmons never returned ; and I was l)egged repeatedly and most earnestly by Bariande, Rillinga and Jewett to go at once to Georgia and Pointe L/ivia, aa the two most important localities, on account of the discoveries of fossils belonging to tlio Primordial fauna. Yielding to this most urgent cull I did go there in 1861, '62, '63, '73 and '74 ; and it took all the time I was able to spare to work out the geology of northwestern Vermont and the vicinity of Quebec. I trusted to Dr. Emmons' observations and still continue to do so ; while, on the contrary, I distrust all the numerous and continu- ally changing opinions of his adversaries, for to my knowledge Dr. Emmons is the only observer with good stratigraphicul, palaeon- tological and lithological principles who has ever studied tliat re- gion. For any impartial person, it is obvious tliat the errors of Mather, Hall, Hitchcock, Dana, Logan, Hunt, etc., who have per- sistently denied the existence of the Taconic system and the Pri- mordial fauna, cannot be placed in opposition to the good and correct observations and conclusions of Dr. Emmons. In order to impress favorably his readers, Mr. Walcott refers to his "principles," and says: "I have studied in the field most of the sections mentioned in this article, and know from which hori- zons the collections were obtained, and therefore with considerable confidence express conclusions that differ from those reached by geologists and palseontologists, who have arrived at their results through the accounts of the observations and collections of others or from stratigraphic or paleeontologic data considered without giving due weight to the importance of combining tliem." And "hammer in hand I examined it (Prospect Peak, Nevada), and collected fossils at all places where they could be found " (see Second Contrihviion to the studies on the Cambrian faunas, etc.', pp. 12 and 33, Washington, 1886). He insists on "priority of definition" and "accuracy of original observations" and also says : "In the evolution of stratigraphic and historic geology, strat- igraphic geology preceded paleeontologic stratigraphy ;" " different sections of strata in the same province may be compared with one another when the continuity is broken ;" "that tlie unit of geologic nomenclature is the formation as lithologically determined ;" "that the means of correlation of the formations of one province with those of another is by order of succession, as stratigraphically de w to AMKRICAN OBOLOOIOAL terinlncd, of the contained orgnnic remains of the respective for matioiiH." And nnally,lio concliKics/Svitli tlie preceding stutenicnts in mind, I tal{o up tlie (piestion of tlie Taconic system in geology, as one tliut can oniy l)c intclligontly understood and decided l)y tlie application of the principles contained in tliem " ("Tlie Taconic system of Emmons, etc.," in Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xxxv, pp. 229, 230, March, 1888). From these quotations it appears tiuit Mr. Walcott supposes Emmons, Barrande and Marcou were lacking in practical knowl- edge of stratigraphy, pahuontology, lithology and of ^' How to observe," in the Held. Evidently the doctrine dea colonies is not considered witli favor by Mr. Walcott, and the dozen of Tren- ton-Clu\zy-Calciferous species found by the late Rev. Wing, in the belt of limestone and marble " that outcrops both on the cast- ern and western side of the Taconic range," is a "hitch," which he cannot accept on account of his "principles." Besides he does not approve the "Precursory centre of creation," showing that fore- runners and prophetic types of the second fauna have made their appearance in America sooner than in Europe ; and that we have here a second example of tlic doctrine dea colonies, only instead of being a part of the third fauna inclosed in tlie strata belonging to the second fauna as in Bohemia, we have a part of the second fauna inclosed in tlie strata of the Primordial fauna and conse- quently in the Taconic system. It is certainly a satl spectacle to see how every opportunity to diminish the merit and the good original works of Dr. Emmons, is eagerly seized upon. But I will only repeat what I have said be- fore : "the truth is always victorious, in spite of opposition and obscurity, and therefore the future of the Taconic system is fully assured" ("The Taconic system and its position in stratigraphlc geology:" Proceed. Amer. Acad, Arts and Sci., vol. xii, p. 175, Cambridge, 1885). 1887-88. — Mr. Marcou demonstrates in two papers read before the Boston Society of Natural History in March and May, the pri- ority of the name Taconic over Cambrian, and continues to sustain the wliole Taconic system, the "Black slates" of Emmons included. He also demonstrates the priority of Champlain over the Ordoviclan system offered lately by Professor Lapworth to deaignate the rocks containing the second fauna of Barrande. 1887. The last issue of Mr. J. D. Dana's Taconic paper, " The 7." i CLAftSiriOATION AND NOMRNCLATURC. tl views of ProfcHHor Emmons on the Tuconic system" (Amer. Jo^^irn. Sci., 8(1 scries, vol. xxxiii, Miiy, 1887, pp. 412-419), is a cmiosity in more tlinn one sense, being n rutlier instructive illiiHtriition uf tlie inside of tlie question, from its advorsiirios. After Rnrrunde nnd Marcou's paper of 18G0, Messrs. Hall and Logan each tried to throw the blame on the other, one saying that it was ^Hhe most able stratigrapiiical geologist of the American continent !" who deceived him ; the other, that it was the greatest American palreontologist "whose opinion is law in American geol- ogy !" tluU misled him. However, tliey soon rallied and, reassured by Dr. Emmons' death in 18fi3, and Mr. Marcou's tem|*orarv ab- sence in Europe, 18G4-71, they put their heads together once more, and in 18G5, using as usual Mr. T. Storry Hunt as their amanuen- sis or secretary, after new investigations and explorations made together of the Taconic area in New York, MassachuHctts and Vermont, they published in the Amer. Journ. ScL, vol. xxxix, p. 96, 18G5, a restatement of their old opinions against the Tuconic system. We have now another rub between Messrs. Dana and Sterry Hunt reproaching each other for having persecuted Emmons and opposed the Taconic system. "Dr. Hunt's opinions were not al- ways couched in courteous language," says Mr. Dana, which is too true ; but it was simply an imitation of the language constantly used in all his controversies by Mr. Dana himself. After marching hand in liand during more than forty years, using freely all their periodicals (Amer. Journ. Sci.., and Canadian Nat.), and their annual publications (Amer. Association Adv. of Science and Geol. Reports of Canada), to persecute and wage persistent war against both Emmons and Marcou, these two old associates, most intimate friends and comrades, have now come to exchange disagreeable remarks and violent attacks, a result long expected by those who know the two wortliies. Mr. Dana tries to explain why he refused to publish Emmons' remarks upon Logan's Report, when he announced his Huronian system, because Dr. Emmons claimed that the Huronian was only a part of the Taconic. "The refusal," he says, "was on the ground that the 'remarks' contained no facts sustaining the opin- ion, and that opinions on such a point without facts were of no value to the science. The Huronian region and the Taconic were remote from one another, and Logan's discoveries of fossils in 22 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL I i: Canada seemed to be too decisive to be so set aside" (Amer. Journ. Sci.^ vol. xxxiii, p. 418, 1887). It is difficult to imagine more lamentably lame excuses. Mr. Dana has filled up his journal, since lie is the geological editor, witli papers of controversial nature without a single fact or obser- vation made in the field or in museums, and such papers entirely valueless to science may be counted by the dozen and even by the hundred. In fact anything opposing Dr. Emmons or Mr. Marcou 'las always been accepted eagerly by him, and often published with commentaries of his own, not "always couched in courteous lan- guage." As to "Logan's discoveries of fossils" in the Huronian, it is one of Mr. Dana's customary bold assertions, made against the print- ed opinion of the originator ; for Logan takes special care in all his papers on the subject, from 1854 to 1863, to insist constantly that he did not find fossils. But this is not all ; never has the char' acter of a man shown itself so plainly and under such an unenvia- ble light, as has Mr. Dana's in this article. He declares that he began tc work on the Taconic question in 1843 ! " learning but publishing nothing." His "investigations in Berkshire were com- menced in July of 1871, in order to get at the truth, without any feeling of opposition to Professor Emmons." Forty-four years of investigations, observations, conclusions, controversies, and not a single fact worth recording, or which can be quoted as good in stratigraphy, or in palaeontology, are certainly anything but creditable. Such negative results speak for them- selves. For a man who, as a writer of mamials, and as an extra- ordinary, severe, unjust and very partial critic against all those who have worked on American geology, without his pcimission and special approbation, to be reduced to admit that "Prof. Em- mons was right in his Berkshire stratigraphical observations," and not because he found it out himself, but simply because a geolo- gist of the United States geological survey, in a single visit in Berkshire during 1886, h«s confirmed Dr. Emmons' observations, is a fact which does not require comm*^ntaries. It classifies Mr. Dana as a practical geologist and an original observer in his right place ; showing the value of his persistent and blind resistance against progress, his opposition a outrance, and his parti pris to ignore a system of 25,000 feet of thickness, more important than the Cambrian (Champlain), Silurian and Devonian put together. !^ ifuiimHwmi (Amer. CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 28 Messrs. Dana and Hall liave not even excuses of distances to travel over, or want of facilities and opportunities to correct their colos- sal error ; for both have passed their lives in full view and at the very door of the Taconic region, and both have maint;iined their systematic opposition in face of all the facts presented by Dr. Em- mons, Barrande and Marcou. It is comforting to see that Mr. Dana has never had any "feel- ing of opposition to Prof. Jimmons," for no one would ever suppose that he was friendly or even strictly just to Emmons and the Ta- conic system. His efforts during forty-four years have been di- rected to "keeping life in wrong conclusions," and in the opposite direction of "truth." And at this late hour, to try to exculpate himself, Mather, Professors Rogers, Hitchcock, Logan and Mr. James H.ill, throwing the blame upon an irresponsible chemist, Mr. T. Sterry Hunt, who has acted during twenty-four and even more years as amanuensis of Logan, Hall and Mr. Dana himself, is not generous. In the Taconic controversy, "discourteous words" and "dis- courteous acts" have been constantly and systematically used by the adversaries of Emmons and Marcou ; and the criticisms made, not only did not " give life and progress to science" as claimed by Mr. Dana, but were of such a nature, that both Emmons and Marcou were so pushed aside and almost silenced, that although neither has ever despaired, or has ever yielded one single iota of his observations, eoch has been obliged to stay outside of official and general relations with all American associations, commit- tees, and special contrivances of the persecutors and recognized enemies of "truth." And now all the efforts of the united oppo- nents against the progress of American geology, during more than forty years, to blot out their unscrupulous and unintelligent acts, will not succeed. Their records will stand, and be a perpetual sub- ject of regret and a black spot in the history of American geology. IV. Cambrian or Champlain System. The priority of Professor Sedgwick's researches and classifica- tions of the rocks containing the second fauna between 1830 and 1835, is unquestionable, and the name of Cambrian is excellent, notwithstanding its original meaning {Cimbri, robbers, and Cam- bna, country of the robbers), on condition of limiting its meaning to only one system and one fauna. '■'f-««i»»SBiw»"Wr'' ■ 24 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL : !! i i ill ! •■ g«. in ,842, .be name fflZto 1!"°°"'" '^■''™' '" "'"<"■ he P'«'n. .„„ consequently they Ce ^TT"' ''"' """ »» Cteo,- The confusion created i„ LI ^ dropped. tae second fauna requiref „ coill" "^ '"''-'"■'""l fossils with '".on of the woflt. "P'^'* fecasting and a careful re^ In A . ^' ^"-™"»' SrsTEM. ^--rS 0:,Srs:Cr'C- -' -^ van..™ and N- Vork, "consid'.sthe rock ^ft? ;■" '"" "' "^ «""« «f ■°g o the Oid Bed sandstone a'd tl,e r' k ""' <""*' ^ "elong- be aiove the Silmtan system ITu, ^'"•'~""'«»"s groups and to conclusion rests, in parln;,^ *:*'»• ^he evidence for h U 'ely on these characters therein ^ '""'""'• "n" f we can «;e «ge and position of „ "ck's!;'';": '■«'« 0-stion regard ^ •Albany, 1838). He makes the Old t^""" ^'"'- ^^'•'- P- 291° Gypseous marl and slates'- or Onold» sandstone end with the fZT '"\0no,^9a lines Je .nZuLTr""' «™"P ■• ""d he '/emu, or Mountain limestone; ' "'•""' """"e »« Carbon. "e see that, from tl.o i,„ • . g^and geologist. M^rmrS^-^"^''''''''' "^ •«"-'»■<- he has constantly -isnnderstood in h"?; id "•'„'"" ""' ""'■' "'»'. „?" ™'"« ■« a guide in geology a! ! ''''""''™"'>". comparison always arrived at erroneous cras;i,ict- """"""'^"ee he has almost only a second-rate Pal«o„to IgUt tnti,""' """''•■'=■'""«. Being ■••'«Te„dao„„p„„,...,. „ * ' """"ngm »8logieal and geo! CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 25 laphj, icli be North Jd in- 1847, and 879; Iiam- ^yof with re- md 39. eo- of to lis m logical knowledge, his judgment is not authoritative, and cannot be compared with tlie opinions and views of Barrande, Agassiz, d'Orbigny, Deshayes, Ed. Forbes, Davidson, de Konincic, McCoy, Salter, Angelin, Linnarson, etc., etc. "Regarding the age and position of our rocI"The gfoloffist of Whipple's expedition, Mr. Jiilos Maicou. finding scattered in tlie valley of this creek, and even in the bed of it, miiny trees petrKled and clmnged into hard and beautifully colored jasper, some of them of consideinble size and length, called the creek Lithodendron, from Lithos (stone) and dendros (tree). Lieutenant Whipple accepted the name and pnt it on his maps and reports, December, 1853." See " Origin of tome geographical names" in the United States Army and Navy Journal, April 22 and 29, 1882, p. 884, 4t0, New York. S N'' 84 AMERICAN UKOKOaiCAL V. M Btnitjv is not easy to cstiUdiHli, tiiid the lioiuotaxy of tlie dilferent divisioiiH utid gi'()ui)s will i't'(|uiru tiiore lliiin ordiniiry pniduiice, leiu'iiiii<; and careful BtiidiuH to bo uHtabliHltud on a ^ood basis ; but we can say now Ibat several most important links exist already between the Atnerican and European Trias, as well palieontologi- cally as lithologieall}'. The Lake Superior horizontal sandstone of La Pointc, Apostle Islands, Hois Uriile river, etc., may be pointed out as an example of extraordinary confusion, brought about by authoritative dictation. Until lHr)0, every geologist who has explored Lake Superior from Drs. D. Houghton, Charles T. Jackson, J. G. Norwood and D. D. Owen ' to Kd. da Verneuil and myself has referred those sand- stones to the Trias. But an agreement was made then to impose the age of the Potsdam sandstone (proofs or no proofs, it was no matter) and to rule out of American geologists any one bold enough to dissent. The leader in that disgraceful piece of tlicta- tion was as usual Mr. James Hall, backed by Logan, Dana, Whit- ney, Foster and Sterry Hunt. One would expect that such a strong coalition would have only one opinion, instead of which, we have a mont astonisliing variety of views, every member of the coalition except J. Hall and Whitney changing twice or even three times the ago of this so-mncli-discussed formation. However, I must say in defence of the adversaries of the Trias, that they have remained true to their triassic opposition, varying only between the lowest crystalline rocks to the Champlain system included, a range of forty thousand feet at least, giving them a sutlicient mar- gin to discuss and disagree. It is almost superfluous to say that I have never varied on the Triassic age of the Lake Superior sandstone, which possesses all the lithological chai;,ctersof a littoral and arenaceous formation of the Bunter sandsteiu. As to palaeontology no fossil has yet been > From IS.'JO to 1840, D. I). Owen, in tt\] his e'\))lorationB nnd reports on tlie Ciiippowa Inntl and Minnesota territory, regarded ttie Keel Siindxtone marls and conglomerates of Lake Superior as contemporary with tlie New lied sandxtone ol' Great Britain, But in IsrjO, lie was notiltcd that he was to accept and use the I'otsdam sandstone age, on the penalty of liaving iiis final report taken from him; and thus losing his many years of researclies in tlie upper Missi8si|)pi region. Owen, having fresh in his mind tlie un- ijiiet and higli-handed removal of Dr. Charles T. Jackson, in 184U, from the direction of the survey of the land district in the state of Michigan, preferred to submit to the dic- tation of tlio ruling association of authoritative geologists, and chanued liis views. This is the explanation of the "myBtery" signalized in Geology of America by J, Mar- cou, p. 12, Zurich, 185S, I did not give it then because the time had not come to dis- close it. t;^- V :^«t<-.-^^ y^i?-^^-; mmlsii OLASSIFICATIUN AND NOMKNCL-VTL'UB. 85 found, oxoopt sovonil OrthiM'i'ntH, omlw»(M»Ml in the moliipliyr iiiid (!oiiv('i-yl>o Siipfiior suiidstoiiti of Lii Puiiitu, Uiu ApustlciMluiidH iiiid liuis Brtilu river. i X. Jurassic Systkm. Tlie old Oolitic sories, or more appropriately the Jurassic sys- tem, was discovered in iHiy',] h\ Jules Marcou at the northwest corner of the llano Kstucado, in the area called Big and Little Tu- cumcari, New Mexico, (hiring his exploration with Lieutenant A. VV. Whipple for the I'acidc Railroad by the .'}5th parallel. The two fossils found are both very characteristic of the Lower Oolites and Oxfordian fauna of Eiighiud and the Jura Mountains. One very common, and very well preserved, is a large (Hryphcua of the dilutata group, which Rlarcou lias called On/pJuea Tucumcarii. It represents the type so abuiKhint in the Oxfordian of the whole of Europe, froJu near Portland (England) to the vicinity of Moscow, (Russia). The other fossil, of which I have collected one single specimen, with a few fragments, at the only section (Pyramid Mount) which I was able to explore — on account of the rapid inarch of the expedition in the Indian territories inhabited then by the Apaches — is a large Ostrea of the Ostrea Marshii group, and very likely a true 0. Marshii identical with the species of the Lower Oolite of England, the Jura Mountains and Wiirtemberg. Farther west first at Laguna, and after near Zuni, I recognized also the Jurassic system, containing near Zuni a thin bed of coal in which, five years later, at the Moquis pueblo. Dr. J. S. New- berry found a "florula Jurassic" {Colorado Explor. Expedition by Lieut. J. C. Ives, Part ni, Geological Report, pp. 83 and 121), 4*°, Washington, 1861). Several years after my discovery of the Jurassic system in North America, it was signalized in other localities of the far west, by different observers and explorers. Mr. Henry Newton says : "The first determination of the Jura in the far west was made by Professor Meek from fossils collected in the Black Hills by Dr. Hayden in 1857" {Geology of the Black Hills of Dakota, 4'°, Washington, 1880). This intentional mis- take is a part of the scheme of my combined adversaries to de- 36 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL prive me of the priority of the discovery of the Jura in North America. At tlie Tucumcari, the Jurassic lias been much eroded and sub- mitted to great denudation, and its thicliness is only about two hundred feet. In tlie Uinta Range the thickness is 250 feet, with a small Liassic fauna. In the Bhicli Hills, the Jura has a thick- ness varying from two hundred to almost six hundred feet ; it con- tains a rather limited fauna of forty-five species of the Lower Oolite and Oxfordian types. In southern Idaho and Wyoming, according to Dr. Peale, the Jurassic has a thickness of 1,500 feet, with a Lower Oolite fauna. In Nevada, West Humboldt Range, Augusta Mountains, the Jura is 5,500 feet thick, with a few Liassic fossils. In Queen Charlotte islands, the Oxfordian and Upper Jurassic fauna; are well repre- sented by Ammonites of the Macrocephali, Co'>'onati and Planulati groups, with some forms related to the Tithonic species. Some Upper Jurassic strata of Colorado and Wyoming, referred at first by Dr. Hayden and his survey to the Cretaceous, and afterward by Mr. O. C. Marsh to the Wcalden, contains a quantity of fragments of vertebra belonging to reptiles and mammalia. A huge Dinosmirus, described by Marsh under the generic name o( At- lantosaunis, is used to characterize that upper part of the American Jurassic; and since 1877 Mr. Marsh has used the name "Atlan- tosaurus beds," to designate the Upper Jurassic of Colorado and Wyoming. Already twenty-five species of mammalia have been described. All belong to very low . orms without any distinctive marsupial characters, but not far from the marsupial, for at first Mr. Rlarsh thought they belonged to that order. Lately he has created a new order for them, under the name o^ Pantotheria. During the civil war (November, 1863), when visiting some friends in camp round Washington, I was shown a fossil "pine- apple" found on the farm of Dr. Jenkins, one mile south of the Baltimore and Washington railroad, sixteen miles from Washing- ton, Prince George County, Maryland. I recognized at once a well preserved Purbeck's Cycadece and referred the red and grey marls, in which it was found in company with pieces of petrified wood and broken pieces of indeterminable bones to the Purbeck forma- tion of England. The little of what I saw there reminds me of the Purbeck group as I saw it at Portland Island and Durlstone Bay ill m CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 37 near "Wej'mouth, England, where so many specimens of mammalia (marsupial), reptiles, turtles, fishes and Cycadece. have been found in its celebrated "dirt bed." Lately the United States Geological Survey have called those white, red, and bluish grey clays and sands "Potomac formation." It is a fresh-water deposit contemporaneous with tlie Purbeck strata of Swanage and vicinity, Dorsetshire, England, which re- present in North America, that most important upper part of the Jurassic system, called now on the continent of Europe the "Pur- beck i an." In California, the Inferior Lias or Sinemurian exists in Plumas county and also near Lake Walker (western Nevada). As to the narrow band of slates between the rive. Stanislas and Merced, referred by the Geological Survey of California (1860-76) to the Jurassic system, it represents the Rhetlc or Upper Trias.' Mr. J. D. Whitney, and afterward Messrs. G. F. Becker, C. A. White and J. S. Diller, have referred the apparition of gold in the Sierra Nevada to the Jurassic time, because gold exists in the Triassic slates of the Mariposa estate, and that gold quartz veins occur " between those slates and not simply near them." I have never said that those Triassic slates were not auriferous, but that the age of the apparition of gold in the Sierra Nevada was not Jurassic, being much older, ante-Taconic, or Lower Palaeozoic at most. Being deposited among golden rocks, which formed the beds and sides of the "fiord, the Rhetic marl got as a part of its material, gold dust and even some small nuggets entombed in them. Long after- wards, during the great break and very strong pressure, which have given the Sierra Nevada its actual shape, those Triassic maris were laminated into slates, more or less metamorphosed like the other Paheozoic slates among which they were forced ; and it is not strange that they partake of all the lithological and miner- alogical characters of the older slates. But it does not follow be- cause they "form an integral portion of the auriferous series" {Notes on the Stratigraphy of California, by G. F. Becker, p. 19, Washington, 1885) that the age of the apparition of gold in the Sierra Nevada is to be put so late as the Jura. The extrication of the gold from the quartz matrix being due to pressure, naturally ^Note sur la yiologie de la Californie par J. Marcou (.Dull. Soc. giol. France, tome xi, p. 407, Paris, 18ti3). J. i IIP 38 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL gold dust entombed in the Triassic marl of the Mariposa may have been united into small nuggets during the process of lamination and crushing. An extremely limited incident in a small portion of the gisement of gold in the Sierra Nevada has been taken as an indication of the true age of the apparition of that precious metal — another of the numerous errors of the Geological Survey of California.^ As it was to be expected, my discovery of the Jurassic system was contested at once and denied by Messrs. James Hall,^ J. D. Dana, W. P. Blake, J. S. Newberry, the two Drs. Shumard, W. M. Gabb, F. B. Meek, Dr. C. A. Wliite, H. Newton, etc. The palaeontologist, Mr. James Hall, has declared most emphati- cally that the "series of sandstone and clays beneath limestones (of Pyramid Mount in tlie Tucumcari area) which are of unquestion- able cretaceous age ;" and also " Having examined the specimens in Mr. Marcou's collection from this locality, I have no hesitV'on in saying that the specimens -abelled by him as Gryphoea Tucum- carii {G. dilatata var. Tucumcarii) are the Gryphcea PUcheri of Morton, and present no features either in form, ciiaracters, condi- tion of preservation, or otherwise, which can serve to distinguish them from Gryphcea PUcheri " {Report on the United States and Mexican Boundary, by Major W. H. Emory, vol. i, part ii, Geol- ogy and Palseontologj', pp. 135 and 136,4'°, Washington, 1857). The two Drs. B. F. and G. G. Shumard have identified my Ostrea Marshii with their Ostrea subovata of Fort Washita ; re- garding at the same time the Jurassic system of Tucumcari as the equivalent of the Fort Washita limestone which they have »Announced with great pomp and emphasis by Mr. J. D. Dana, in Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. XXX, a^ series, Nov., 1860, p. 424, who says : "no similar enterprise in the United States has ever been set on foot on a more liberal and enlightened basis, or opened under more favorable auspices as respects either the importance of the woi^; to be done or the ability of tliose charged with the duty;" the Geological Survey of California, Director J. D. Whitney, alter an existence ol fifteen years, is a clioice example of a failure among the numerous State surveys. It had not even publislied the smallest sketch geological map of tlie State, or of any part of California, nor given a general classiiScation and nomenclature worth discussing. And instead of being u progress over wliat was tlien already known of the geology of California, it is a very marked backward move— even as regi.rds the physical geography of the Sierra Nevada and Mount Shasta, classiQed by Mr. Whitney and his assistants as being devoid of glaciers. * The amount and tone of the criticisms and strictuies against Mr. Marcou's discov- eries during his exploration by the 35th parallel of latitude— the first crossing of the United States and North American continent by a geologist— is anything but creditable to all those involved in them (see Jieply to the Criticisms of James D. Dana, by Jules Marcou, Zurich, 185(t). CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 89 placed above the "Arenaceous group" and "Red river group," that is to say in the Upper Cretaceous system of Texas. Seldom has such an accumulation of errors, palseontological, stratigraphical and lithological been committed in American geol- ogy. For the mistakes did not stop there, and Messrs. J. Hall' and the brothers Shumard,^ followed by Dr. R. H. Loughridge^ and others, classified, as Lower Cretaceous or Dakota group of Texas, all the Triassic system besides the Jurassic; at the same time they contrived to synchronize the Neocoviian of Fort Wa- shita, the False Washita and Canadian rivers with the Marly Chalk or Turonian.'^ The only oiher great error with which comparison may be made is the Taconic system. The same men, Messrs. J. Hall and J. D. Dana, by erroneous palseontological determination and false clas- sification, and without any regard to practical geology and strati- graphy, have misled those who followed their views. To be sure there is no excuse for any practical geologist accepting errors, trying to force them as true, and spreading such notions on American ge- ology ; and all followers and propagators of J. Hall and J. D. Da- na's stupendous mistakes will have to take their shares in the blame, which one day is sure to reach them. It is only a question of time, which now cannot last many years longer ; for it has gone already too long for the good reputation of American geology. It is un- necessary to say that no one of my opponents had visited the Tucumcari area, and that until 1887, no geologist had been there except myself, in 1853. All the government exploring geologists from 1858, until now, have carefully avoided coming at a distance of at least one hundred miles from the northern part of the llano Estacado and Pyramid Mount. The main object of Dr. J. S. New- > Report U. S. and Mexican Boundary and Geological Map attached, 1857. « A Partial Report on the Geology of Western Texas, by Geo. G. Slmmard, Austin, 1886. » Tenth Census of the U. S. < Dr. G. G. Shiimard in A partial report on the Geology of Western Texas, Austin, 1886, describes wliat he calls: "the Lower Cretaceous or Marly clay group," with re- marks on the "paIa.>ontology" of this formation, at pp. 2-1 to 27, which to say the least ia a curious reading. Combined with the paper of his brother Dr. B. F. Shumard entitled Observations upon the Cretaceous Strata of Texas, St. Louis, 18(iO, we have an array of errors almost incredible. For they have not the excuse of being unacquainted with the country— at least a great part of Texas and New Mexico— and it ia hard to conceive how two observers, one a pretty good palaeontologist, could have erred to such aa extent. 40 AMERICAN GEOLOOICAL berry's two explorations in 1858 and 1859 was to control and if possible to deny all Mr. Maroon's observations and discoveries in New Mexico. Truly he did all he could to juslifj Messrs. Hall and Dana's confidence, using to his best his opportunity. How- ever, he was rather shy of recording his observations on a map ; and after his failure of a geological map for the Colorado, Grand Canon and Moquis r-rpedilion (in two sheets, Nos. 1 and 2 of Ives' Jieport of the Colorado river), he did not venture to publish a geo- logical map of his second expedition in New Mexico, notwithstand- ing his long stay and explorations around Santa Fe. His results were heralded, first in a letter to Mr. Meek, pub- lished in the Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xxviii, second Series, p. 298, 1859, under the attractive and sensational title: Dr. Newberry's late Exj^lorations in New Mexico. He shows Marcou's so-called Ju- rassic to be Cretaceous; then Dr. Newberry published two volumi- nous reports, Colorado Exploring Expedition, Geological Report, 4'°, Washington, 18G1, and Santa Fe to Green river Exploring Expedi- tion, Geological iie/jort, 4'", Washington, 1876 ;* and afterward from fear that his results might not be accepted, he dispatched in the region of Santa Fe and Fort Union, his pupil, Mr. J. J. Steven- son, with the special purpose to maintain them. I have never answered Dr. Newberry's assertions and observa- tions, because he did not give any really serious material proofs against nie. He chose to publish loose observations, wanting in details, exactness, and palteontological knowledge. To be sure he has emphatically declared that the "Jurassic rocks do not occur on any part of the route followed by Mr. Marcou, and where he claims to have discovered thera"^ (Explor. Exped. Santa Fe to > Any impartial reader of these two works will be astonished at the constant attacks of Dr. Newl)erry against me. It seems as if he were eager to vie with the bitterness and injustice of tlie previous attacks by Messrs. J. Hall, J. D. Dana and W. P. Blake; and as thougli he wanted to give the impression that it was almost ii crime on my part, to have the audacity to maintain my observatious, saying that such a proceeding is " almost unentlurablc." The boldness witli which Dr. Newberry has tried to throw against me his rather childish oliji'ciions and undigested views and opinions on New Mexican geology is al- most incredible, and shows >i'hat a prejudiced man and an amateur geologist and palas- ontologist is able to accumulate in order to prevent the acceptation of "truth." ' More tlian twenty years alter, two maps, marked sheets Nos. 75 and 76 of the Geo- logicnl Atlas.W Uee\ev'6 Kxplorations, have given the geology of my route from Inscrip- tion rocks, at the western foot of the Sierra de Zunl to Cactus Pass and the Bill Wil- liam fork. On slicet No. ^^ my name was inscribed without my knowledge with those of Messrs. U. K. Gilbert and A. K. Marviue as geological assistants, notwithstanding CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 41 Green River, p. 142) ; and he has used the dicotyledonous leaves with great advantage to him, as well as what he was pleased to call the Oryphcea Pitcheri and Gryphcea Tucumcarii ; but at the same time he has always been very careful not to localize on a geo- logical map the exact points where he found them, and he did not publish figures or descriptions of any sort of the two Gryphiea and of the leaves, an easy way to escape control and to appear as an ex- pert in the matter. Two quotations of his reports will be sufHcient to show his ability and what degree of confidence may be placed in him as a practical geologist and palaeontologist. At p. 42 of his Geological Report of the Colorado Expl. Exped.^ Dr. Newberry gives a "Section of the Canon of the Colorado, etc.," absolutely fantastical when compared with the sections of the grand canon of the Colorado published lately by Major J. W. Powell {Ge- ology of Uinta Mountains^ p. 61, 4*°, Washington, 1876) and Mr. C. D. Walcott {Pre- carboniferous strata in the Grand Canon of the Colorado, Arizona, in Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xxvi, Dec, 1883, and Classifications of the Cambrian System of North America, in Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xxxii, Aug., 1886, p. 144, fig. 4, Grand Canon section). A more easy section is difficult to find, and Dr. Newberry's complete failure to make it out, calling Potsdam, Silu- rian, Devonian rocks which have absolutely nothing to do with those formations, is anything bi't creditable. At p. 83 of the same Report of the Colorado Expedition, Dr. the erroneous reference by Mr. Gilbert of the rocks between Cniion Diablo and the ex- tinct S(in Francisco volcano, to the Carboniferous instead of the Dyas (Permian) as I have called them. But for tlie sheet No. 7U, I protested against the further use of my name, except if my determination of Dyas, Trias and Jura, as I found them, should be recorded on the map, sending a corrected map according to my observations and views. My corrections were not accepted, and consequently my name was witlidrawn from sheet No. 70. Mr. Gilbert failed to recognize tlic Dyas and Jura, maintaining Dr. Newberry's views. Lately (August, lt>87) Captain C. E. Dutton has given a Geologic Map of Northwest- e; n Mexico, 1884 (Sixtli Ann. Rep. U. S. Geol. Surv., i>late xiv, p. 128, Washington, 1885 [1887]), covering my route from Laguna to Zuui (see tlie Geological Map o/Keio Mexico, by Jules Marcou, ISHl); and in which he gives tbeJurasnic rocks, with a point of interro- gation, tlrsl at Laguna, then on eai^li side of the Sierra de Zuni and all around Zuui. Besides, the Dyas exi^^ts on the road tVom Aqnafriato Inscription rocks. So, according to this observer, mv discoveries of 18.53 are accepted and made use of. To be 8ure I did not recognize tiie Dyas at the same s|)ot, because it was covered then by a thick lorest at the very narrow strip wliere I crossed It; but fartlicr west near C.-iiion Dial)lo, I did not hesitate to refer to the Dyas, the magiiesian limestone of tlie region. It is a ilrst Btep toward the recognition of my discoveries after more tiiun tliirty years of nega- tion of the exactness of my observations. 42 AMKRICAN GEOLOGICAL Newberry says, that he found near the Moqiiis villages in a coal seam a Juraftsic Jlonda which he describes, on pp. 129 to 132, with figures. In his second Exploring Expedition from Santa Fe to Green River, on p. 142, he says: " It is, however, true at the present time that no Jurassic plants have been found on this con- tinent." Nothing can be more conclusive than these two examples ; for we have there, in indubitable form, Dr. Newberry's way of observ- ing as a stratigraphist and a palaeontologist. His pu[)il Professor J. J.Stevenson was no more successful, and his Report upon Northern New Mexico during the years 1878 and 1879, in Wheeler's U. S. Geographical Survey, vol. iii, Siqiplement ; Geology, 4'°, Washington, 1881, contains an extremely meagre ac- count, vvithout a single fact to sustain it or even worth recording, of the Trias and Jurassic, which he calls "Jura-Trias." Although he explored at leisure the Upper Canadian and the vicinity of Fort Union, Pecos and Galisteo villages, he did not find the Gryphcea Pitcheri, nor the Gryjthma dilatata var. Tucumcarii, so often quoted by Dr. Newberry in that same area ; and he hardly refers to the dicotyledonous leaves, except in one instance of a few iiidistinct im- pressions near the Galisteo creek. Notwithstanding these defects and absolute want of proofs, Mr. Stevenson has given a geological map of North Central New Mexico, No. 3, showing a most extra- ordip.ary geographical distribution of Dakota cretaceotis ! of Car- boniferous ! and a " linear outcrop of Jura-Trias !" which endorses entirely Dr. Newberry's erroneous views. I have so often shown the grave errors made in identifying the Gryphcea Tucumcarii and Ostrea Marshii with the G. Pitcheri and 0. subovnta, that it is almost superfluous to insist again. However, I have lately received specimens from Fort Washita, which have led me to review the whole subject, and the result is that there is absolutely nothing in common between the Gryphcea Pitcheri of Morton and Roemer and the Gryphcea Tucumcarii. Their charac- ters are different in every way, and tlie Jurassic form of tiie Tu- cumcari area cannot be confounded with any cretaceous Gryphcea or Ostracce. It is a case even more clear and with more distin- guishing characteristics, as between the Atops trilineatus Emmons of the Taconic identified by Mr. J. Hall with the Calymene Beckii, C" the Elliptocephala asaphoides regarded by him as an Asaphus. CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 43 In both cases, the paleeontologist of New York has given false determination of fossils, in order to suppress great systems of strata, the Taconic and the Jura, of which his knowledge is most deficient. I XL Cretaceous System. L. Vanuxem was the first geologist who discovered the Creta- ceous system in North America. It was in 1828. (Geological ob- servations on the Secondary, Tertiarti and Alluvial formations of the Atlantic const of the United States of America. Arranged from the notes of Lardner Vanuxem, by S. G. ]\Iorton, Philadel|)hia.) He also made the true distinction between the Secondary, Tertiary and Quaternary rocks. The American Cretaceous system, like the European Cretaceous, is divided into three great divisions.' First, tiie Neocomian found- ed at Fort Washita and on the False Washita and Canadian rivers by J. Marcou in 1853. Until now the Neocomian exists only in Texas and in the Indian Territory. When it was deposited and consequently at the end of the Jurassic epoch, a great upheaving of the North American continent took place and there was then more dry land or terra Jirma than ever before and probably than now. But during the Middle Cretaceous great changes took place, subsidences can be signalized on two-thirds of the continent and finally, at the end of the Cenomanian, the sea invaded the whole basin of the ui)per Missouri, the Rocky Mountains region north and south, the Colorado basin, etc. It was the last extensive inva- sion of the sea in America. After the deposition of the Neoco- mian, a great erosion with upheaval in Texas and subsidence in all other parts of the United States, took place, and we have had the deposits of the "Lower Cross Timber group and basal shales" of Mr. Hill of Trcas, representing in part the Gault and Green sand of England, the Cenomanian of France. It was immediately fol- lowed, in the Great Missouri basin, the Colorado, etc., by the dep- osition of the true Marly and White chalk or Txironian and Senonian of d'Orbigny. > If the Gnult or Middle Cretaceous is to be united with the Neocomian and form the Lower Crttaceous— the Cretaceous pyftem being divided into two great divisions of tlie third order, Instead of three— then we have in Texas in tlie Lower Cretaceous, the "Comanche series" of Mr. Robert T. Hill, aud his "Lower Cross Timber series." I have no objection against tliis grouping of the Cretaceous system, which seems to ob* tain the majority of the opinions of the luteruatioual Geological Congress, for the pro* posed geological map of Europe. 44 AMERICAN 6K0LOOICAL This lust gi-ea tdivision is the most common, being well devel- oped with variable groups called Dakota, Colorado and Fox Hills ; and also subdivisions, such xs Fort Benton, Niobrara and Fort Pierre groups or sub-stages. The exact s3'nchroni8m of the Cretaceous of the Great Missouri basin was made by Marcou in 18G3, when ho recognized the Dakota group of Nebraska and Sioux city (Iowa), as belonging already to the true Chalk instead of the Lower Cretaceous of Messrs. Hall and Meek and forming a part of the Turonian or Marly chalk; re- ferring at the same time the cretaceous marl of Galisteo (New Mex- ico) to the same horizon. The Cenomanian does not exist there, and the geologists, who even now refer the Dakota group to it, are mistaken. In California the Cretaceous is limited to the northwest corner of the state and occupies a small area west of Mount Shasta. The Geological Survey directed by Mr. J. D. Whitney has called Creta- ceous all the Eoc(Mie of Fort Tejon and Ciiico creek. Lately, Dr. C. A. White (Oh the Mesozoic and Cenozoic palceoiUology of Call' fornia, p. 17, in Bulletin U. S. Geol. Surv. No. 15, Washington, 1885) has put forward as a sort of compromise, the notion that the " Chico group" is " later than any formation that has yet been re- ferred to the Cretaceous period either in Europe or in America ;" and is more recent than any one known except perhaps in New Zealand. 1 A great Cretaceous division of the third order, of 5,000 feet thick, and unique in the northern hemisphere is a needless impossibility ; for the Chico formation represents in California the Lower or true Eocene, having a fauna contemporaneous and most characteristic of the Tertiary epoch. The existence of only two or three degen- erate representatives of genera of the Cephalopod family in the Chico group has misled Messrs. Gabb, Newberry and White ; pa- laeontology being for them narrowly confined only to the Cepha- lopoda, and to an absolute rule of extinction all the workl over • The same niithor says : " The Larnmic group represents in America a great and im- portniil period of [tlie Cretaceous Hystem] whici) is yet unknown in any other part of the worli! " {Eleventh Ann. Hep. U. S. Geol. and Geogr. Survey for 1877, p. '264, Wash- ington, i87!0- It appears Irom tliese two quotations tliat Dr. Wliite regards tlie two great groups of Laramie and Cliico, as Cretaceous, but not contemporaneous and at the same time botli more recent tlian any grou|)8 in tlie Atlantic States and in Europe; an opinion rather eccentric which it will be dilUcult to burmonize with any classiflcu- tion and nomenclature. CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 45 W of the Ammonites, Ifelicoceras nnd BacuUtm, — certainly a very pe- culiar interpretation of fossil remains and their use in goology. An important remark is that tlie Dakota group is always re- garded as Loiver Cretaceous by Mr. J. Hall and his followers, and one of them has gone so far as to say, that I have pronounced the Dakota group as being at " the base of the Cretaceous as that series is accepted in America" (U. S. Geographical Survey west of the 100th meridian, vol. iii, Stipplement — Geology, by J. J. Ste- venson, p. 153, 4'°, Washington, 1881). I am obliged to repeat once more that, in 1863, during my ex- plorations in Nebraska {Une reconnoissance rjeolngique au Nebraska par Jules Marcou, in Bnlletin Soc. geol. cle France, tome xxi, p. 132, Paris, 1864), I referred the Dakota group to tiie Upper Cretaceous of America, and forming the first group of the true Chalk formation containing White Chalk^ as in Europe. In 1853 I recognized the Neocomian far below the Dakota group, and in 1861 1 gave a tabular view of the Texas cretaceous showing the three great divisions as in Europe {Notes on the Cretaceous and Carboniferous Rocks of Texas, l)y J. Marcou, in Proceed. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. viii, p. 93, Boston). Dr. C. A. Wliite, following Messrs. J. Hall, Shumard and Meek says : " It is a well-known fact that we have in North America no strata, which are, according to European standar Is, equivalent with the Lower Cretaceous of Europe, but that all Noi th American strata of the Cretaceouu period are equivalent with those of the Upper Cretaceous of that part of the world" {Eleventh Ann. Rep. U. S. Geol. and Geogr. Survey for \9>11, p. 264, Washington, 1879) ; passing over my discovery in 1853, of the Neocomian in Texas and the Indian Territory, and my tabular view of the Texas Creta- ceous {Notes on the Cretaceous rocks of Texas, in Proceed. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. vni, [>p. 80-93, 1861). Lately, however, Dr. White, better informed on tlie 1 ?xas Cretaceous, by the original researches of his assistant Mr. R. T. Hill, has admitted the exist- ence of the Neocomian, and with some reluctance the exactness of my tabular view of 1861 {On the Cretaceous formation of Texas, and their relation to those of other portions of North America by 'It was the first discovery and announcement of the existence of true chalk which can be used ns such in America. Dr. Hayden more than two yeiirs after referred to the existence of true chalk in America, neglecting to say who made tlie discovery, and seeming to appear as the iXiacoverer (Description of an extentive chalk depotit on the Missouri river, by Dr. Hayden iu Proceed, Amer. Phil. Soc, November 16, 1880, Phila- delphia). si^^^i^A 46 AMEniCAN OKOLOGICAL C. A. White,' in Proceed. Acad. 2^at. Sci., riiiladclphia, February, 1887). Mr. R. T. Hill has given recently a detailed classification and nomenclature of the Cretaceous of Texas : The Topography and Geology of the Cross Timbers and surrounding region in Northern Texas, in Amer. Jonrn. Sci.,yo\. xxxiii, p. 299, 1887, in which he corrects the errors of Messrs. Roenier and the two brothers Slui- mard, already signalized by me as far back as 1861. In a second paper entitled "The Texas Section of the American Cretaceous" {Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xxxiv, Oct., 1887, p. 287), Mr. Hill places the "Dakota" as the equivalent of his "Lower Cross Timber division," regarding also the "Eagle ford shales" as well as the "Dakota" as Middle Cretaceous. The fauna of the Engle ford shales is identical with the fauna of the Dakota of Galisteo (New Mexico) and Sioux City (Iowa), and belongs to the inferior part of the Upper Cretaceous, or true Chalk formation, or Tmonian. The Lower Cross Timber division may perhaps be referred to tlie Middle Cretaceous or Cenomanian ; but it will require additional researches before we can reach any definite conclusion. As to the Washita and Fredericksburg divisions, called now by Mr. Hill "Comanche series," their two faunas represent the Neo- comian, the Aptian and the Cenomanian of the Jura Mountains, to which I referred them in 1863 and 1861. The upper portion of the "Washita division" is certainly young- er than the Neocomian and ouglit to be referred to the Middle Cre- taceous, having a fauna wliich has many affinities with the Green > HiiTing committed himself so strongly in 1870, in regard to the nge nnd synchronism of tlie greiit divisions of tlie American and European Cretaceous system, Ur. Clinrlcs A. Wliitc tried his best to escape from the responsibility, talcing great cure at tiie same time to appear as nn original investigator and discoverer. His paper is a ratlier singular eulogy of very poor works, saying " the work so well begun by Dr. Sluimard;" "the really valuable work of Dr. B. F. Sliumard;" "the ad- mirable work of Prof. Uoemer." It would have been more Just, if instead of praising the great mistakes and constant errors of Messrs. Ferdinand Uoemer, James Hall, the two Drs. Sliumard and their followers, he had simply given their tallies of superposition of the strata and general sections, with their homotaxial opinions, and placed them in full view of my table of IWil of the Cretaceous strata of Texas, and of the general section lately arrived at by Mr. U. T. Hill. The comparison of those tables would have permitted every reader to judge for himself of the real value of the work, done by each observer. But, instead, Dr. White, against all the rules of priority, passes over my discoveries of 18.i3 and my observations of 1861, and tries to make believe, that he is the discoverer of " the true relations of the different Cretaceous formations which have long been known to 'sxist within the state of Texas," wlien he simply endorses and patronizes the investigations of his chief assistant Mr. Hill, and revives the discoveries and opin- ions given by mo in 1853, 18G1 and 1863. CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATCnE. 47 sand and Gnult fiuiiia of England and tlie Jura (or tlie Aptlan, AU bian and Cenonianian of d'Oibigny). Mr. Hill in liis two papers identifies the Gryphcca dilatata, var. Tucnmcarii a,\n\ the Ostrea Mamhii of the Pyramid Mount section, in the Tucunieari region, with sjjecies of his "Washita division" of central Texas, and refers the Jurassic system of the northwest corner of the llano Kstacado to the lower part of his Washita di- vision, calling it "Jurassic and Neocomian of Marcou," a confusion which I did not make, having on the contrary insisted on their complete separation, and protested again and again against such erroneous views. As Mr. llill luis not yet explored the Tucumcari region, he has simply repeated the old mistake of Messrs. James Hall, Meek, the two brothers Shumard, Newberry and others. However he has separated, what he calls the Gryphwa PUcheri var. dilatata Marcou (which I suppose is my Oryphoiii dilatala var. Tucumcarii) not only from the true Gryjiluva PUcheri of Morton, but he goes so far even as to place it as a distinct variety from the GryphoM Pitcheri \ni'. navia Couviu], and the Gryphcea Pitdierivav. forniculata White, having then three varieties of the G. PUcheri, besides the typical species. Farther on, Mr. Hill calls the G. Pitch' eri an "anomalous form" which, according to his view, is "a Ju- rassic form, which has continued into the Cretaceous of this coun- try ;" adding that the G. PUcheri var. navia of Conrad "is almost indistinguishable from the G. arcicala of the European Lias." All these wavering and singular opinions, brought up and origi- nated by the confusion of a false identification made by INIr. James Hall, show a desire to bring an excuse and pave the way for a change in the determination given with such certainty and au- thority in 1856 and 1857, h" my adversaries. Messrs. Hill and White have just begun to realize that the Gryphcea contains less "confusing variations," than the "later Ostreidm." A more careful study of the sub-genera Gryphcea will convince them that confusion has arisen only from a want of knowledge, and that the American Gryphcea are as well defined, and as good species, as the European ones ; and more, they will see that the G. PUcheri is easily distin- guishable not only from the G. arcuata of the Lower Lias, but also from G. obliqua and G. cymhium of the Middle Lias, and from the G. dilatata of the Oxfordian. Close study and attentive compar- ative palaeontology and stratigraphy will show them, how and why, errors on the part of my adversaries have been so persistently maintained. 48 AMKUICAN GKOI-OOICAL XII. LowKu Tkhtiaiiy Systkm. The Tertinry series two divided into two Hysteina, well jtinrked by tiicir strtitignipliy, pMlivoiitolojiy, litliolo^y ftud gPogrn|)iiieul diHtrihiitioii. Tlie marine tmd tetreNtiiul t'luituu nltlioii^h speeiiil to AniericH, are Hiinilar and related hy many a link, with thuse of the Tertiary of Eniope, A.sia and Africa. The names Kocene and Olijfoeene can be retained and nsed with advantii«j;e on account of their the question, has taken the matter in hand ; and it is a matter of re- gret for the progress of American geology that a competent person has not j'et been chosen for the work. The Pliocene exists round Los Angeles and other localities in California. It is only the upper group of the superior Tertiary and is mainly a part of the great Miocene formation, occupying a position relatively to it, somewhat analogous to tlie Oligocene in regard to the Eocene. Fresh-water Miocene and Pliocene forma- tions exist east of the Rocky Mountains and in Oregon. Mr. O. C. Marsh has recognized five faunas and as many groups, and Mr. E. Cope three groups and six faunas. It was from the Miocene of Ne- CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 53 braska tliat Dr. Joseph Lei Jy obtained the materials for his first and justly celebrated great work on the vertebrata of North America, entitled The ancient fauna of Nebraska, 4'", Washington, 1853. Dr. John Elvans visited and explored the Bad Lands of Nebraska during 1849 and brought with him the main part of the specimens used by Dr. Leidy. XIV. Quaternary and Recent or Modern Series. This series is divided into two sj'stems or divisions of the sec- ond order. The inferior embraces all the old Quaternary or drift divisions, so well developed in America : ^1) as alluvial drift along the Mississippi river basin, the Sacramento and San Joaquin val- leys, the Colorado river, the Rio Grande del Norte ; (2) as cave deposits and Loess ; and (3) as glacial deposits in all the northern part of the eastern United States and Canada, in the whole area of the Rocky Mountains region, and in the Sierra Nevada and Cas- cade range. The superior system, or actual deposits, is made by rivers, lakes, seas, delta, glaciers, landslides, sandy dunes, etc., etc. Glacial Epoch. America is one of the most important parts of the world for the extension of old glaciers. Having been explored by Louis Agas- siz, the father of the glacial epoch, ^ the glacial phenomenon has * Dr. Otto Vogel, Mr. James D. Dana and a few others having lately called In ques- tion the right of priority of Agaesiz, it is necessary and jus to dispose of such errone- ous notions, Karl Friedrich Schimper has only the merit of first coining and using the word JUit- zeit (glacial epoch), in a small bit of half-humorous and half-scientiflc poetry, printed and distributed at Ncuchatel Feb. 15, 1837, when on a visit at the house of Agassiz. on tlie occasion of his (Schimper's) birtliday. A few montlis later, Sohimper wrote a letter to Agassiz, from the house of de Charpentier at Bex, wliich was printed by AgasEiz un* der the title: Ueber die Eiseeit, in tlie "Actes de la Soci^t4 helv^tique des Sciences naturelles," pp. SS-'Jl, after Agassiz's -elebrated Discours de Neuchatel, le 24 Juillet, 1837. Beside^, Agassiz in that discourse declares most fi-ankly that the explanation given by him "est le resultat de la combinaison de mes id^es et de celles de M. Schim- per." That is all Schimper's collaboration to the glacial epoch. He never studied carefully the glaciers, nor did ho extend the glacial theory by direct observations in any part of the world except in the Swartzwald and Bavaria. His coming across a surface of Ju- rassic limestone polished and striated at Landeron near Neuchatel, Dec. 19, 1836, was nothing more than a new locality added to many others of the Jura borders, already well known to Agassiz, de Charpentier and de Montmollin. As to Arnold Guyot anticipating a number of Agassis' most important conclusions on glaciers, as claimed by Mr. Dana, it is against all the well-known dates of Agassiz' ex- plorations and publications; and I have sufficiently refuted, with all details and facts, such unfounded statements, in my letter Olaciera and Olacialists, published in '-Science," July 23, vol. VIII, pp. 7a-aO, New York, 1886. 54 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL 1. Si been compared in all its grand features and details with the clas- sical ground and birthplace of the Theorie glaciaire in the basin of the Rhone. Nowhere in Europe, even in Scandinavia or the Alps, are there such a fine development and beautiful remains of glacial deposits and glacial works. In Canada, New England, New York and the northern states comprising all the Great Lakes, parts of Pennsylvania, Ohio, In- diana, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Dakota, an immense sheet of ice (une calotte de glace) covered all, giving almost one unbroken mass of ice similar to the one now covering Greenland, but on a much grander scale. That gigantic and enormous glacier has left its "Terminal Moraine" on a line, which follows more or less the 40th parallel, extending from the Atlantic coast to the upper Mis- souri {Preliminary paper of the Terminal Moraine of the second gla- cial epoch, by T. C. Cliamberlain, in Third Anri. Rep. U. S. Oeol. Surv., p. 295 and Plate xxviii, Washington, 1883 ; and also The Glacial boundary in Ohio^ Indiana, and Kentucky, by G. F. Wright, Cleveland, Ohio, 1884). In the Rocky Mountains, Wasatch Moun- tains, and the Humboldt Sierras great glaciers have existed and descended from all the great peaks into the valleys, leaving every- where their marks of boulders, scratched rocks {Roches strikes et moutonnees) and moraines. At Manitou and round Colorado City at the foot of Pike Peak, the traces of old glaciers are perfect and as beautiful as in Valais (Switzerland). The Sierra Nevada is even more prolific in all the phenomena connected with the glacial epoch ; the great mass of auriferous gravels, with few exceptions, being remains of old glacier deposits of the Quaternary period. Singularly enough, the geologist, recommended by Agassiz to di- rect tlje Geological Survey of California, has failed completely to recognize not only the true age of the Quaternary glacial deposits of the Sierra Nevada, which he has assigned to the Tertiary (Eo- cene, Miocene and Pliocene), but has gone so far astray as to take the Sierra Nevada for a basis to deny the existence of the "Ice age," the greatest discovery of Agassiz ! To make the matter worse, Mr. J. D. Whitney has published his paradoxical and backward paper, in the quarto-serials founded by Louis Agassiz at his Museum ; and in the same volume vii, which contains the last posthumous memoir of Agassiz. The title is: The climatic changes of later geological times; a discussion based on observations made in the Cordilleras of North America^ by J. D. n. CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATDRU. 55 Whitney — a controversial dissercation out of date and out of place. By out of date, I do not mean to say that the value of the paper would have been improved if it had been published fifty years ago ; but only that it would have been then somewhat excusable, just as the anti-glacialist memoirs of Lecoq, Durocher, De Luc, Godefroy and Frapolli are. As usual, Mr. James D. Dana, with his pen ever ready to sus- tain all the errors and prevent the progress of American geology, has taken up the same cause, attacking me most violently and er- roneously, because I have quoted only very slightly the obnoxious memoir, in a carefully written and very exact paper on the Glaciers and Olacialists, published July 23, 1886, in "Science," vol. viii, p. 76, New York. In a letter to "Science," vol. viii, p. 162, August 20, 1886, Mr. J. D. Dana declares most emphatically that the Memoirs of the Museum of Comparative Zoology were not founded by Louis Agassiz, and that Mr. Whitney, although he " opposes Agassiz, has not a word of disparagement for Agassiz and gives no just cause of personal complaint," — two assertions audaciously incorrect, which show that Mr. Dana is as low in the scale of geo- logical critics as he is as an observer in historical geology by his incompetency during forty-four years to recognize the Taconic* Agassiz received a first grant of ten thousand dollars from the legislature of Massachusetts in 1863 for the publication of those memoirs, an act which must seem unparalleled and most extraordi- nary to any one who knows how parsimonious and extremely care- ful of the public purse the Massachusetts legislatures are. No one but Agassiz, and even no corporation, however powerful and in- fluential, would have succeeded in getting money from the General Court and the Governor of Massachusetts for such special purpose as the publication of purely scientific memoirs, and nothing shows so well the great popularity and immense attractive power exercised by Agassiz, as the fact that, in the middle of the great civil war, when all the resources of Massachusetts were bent to support her armies in the field, he was able to obtain a considerable sum of money to print the transactions of his museum. As to the pro- > Whatever may bo Mr. Dana'a talents and knowledge as a niineralogist and a zoolo. gist, his intervention in liistoricul geology has been most uni'oi tunato, both as an ob- server and as a critic. Uis elementary boolis have disseminated false and erroneous notions on almost all questions of American stratigraphy ; and unc'.er an appearance of competency, without any solid base to rest upon, he has contributed largely to prevent the acceptance of the trutli. 56 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL Sir priety, on Mr. Whitney's part, of publishing in memoirs, founded by Louis Agassiz,! a negation of tlie best and most important dis- covery ever made by tluit great naturalist, and to ignore him as being the discoverer of the existence of ancient glac'evs in the Britislj dominions, in New England and New York, in Brazil, in the straits of Magellan and in Cliili, is, to say the least, most un- grateful and unjust. And the saying of Mr. Dana, that my remark "is essentially groundless," is another bold attempt to depiiVe a man of genius of the full share of his splendid discoveries. Et'ery body knows well that Louis Agassiz founded the two pub- lications of his IViuseum — Bulletin and Transactions {Memoirs) — as special contributions to the progress of natural history in the United States and not for its retardation. It is hard for his memory and such a noble example, that a " j' long and diffuse work has been publislied by the man who succeeded him in his chair of geology at Harvard University which, if accepted as true and sufficiently proved,^ will not only hinder the advancement of a science so dear to Agassiz, but carry that great question of the " Ice age " more than fifty year? backward, as it was before the justly celebrated Discours prouonce a Neuchatel in 1837, by Agas- siz before the Helvetic Naturalist Society as its president. What shall we say of the work of a man, who pretends to deny the " glacial epoch " and the " glacial doctrine," who not only did not give any credit to Agassiz for his superb work at the glacier of the Aar, and his discoveries of old glaciers in the United Kingdom of England and Ireland, and in North and South America, but passes over them as if Agassiz had done nothing on the subject? Is there anything more contemptible? Even the name of the dis- coverer of the " Ice age " is not given once in Whitney's large > Agassiz did not give at first a general title to his 4to publications, using only as a anbtit. e ''Illustrated Catalogue." But in his Annual Report of ATuseum Compar. Zool, for 1867, he has employed at p. 7, first the name transactions in a general way, and a few lines farther on as a special title with a great majuscule T, as the definite title: Transactions of the Musetim of Comparative Zoology. Three years after his death the word Transactions was abandoned an^ replaced by Memoiri. * Students, assistants of Museums and Surveys, and even naturalists of some repu- tation and renown have been deceived and led astray by Mr. Whitney. Happily all the practical geologists, more especially those interested in the glaciers and glacial theory, have regarded that singular paper as the most retrograde, incomplete and in- competent geological memoir published in America during the last forty years. The omission or more than two-thirds of the discoveries of old glaciers in the world, in- cluding those made by Louis Agassiz in Europe and in America, shows au almost total ignorance of the subject. CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 57 quarto volume. No excuse can be given for such an imposition on the geology of America, and on that breach of the most ele- mentary uourtesy and dignity due to Louis Agassiz. : Living Glacikrs. Actual glaciers, although very small in comparison with what they were at the beginning of the Modern series during the Qua- ternary system, exist in the Rocky Mountains, the Great Basin, the Sierra Nevada, Mount Shasta, the Cascade Range, besides British Columbia and Alaska. Mr. W. H. Holmes, U. S. Geological &urvey, has found active glaciers in the Wind River and Tetons ranges of the Rocky Moun- tains. Others have been signalized since in the Flathead region, the Great Basin and northern Colorado. In the Sierra Nevada, Mr. J. Muir, as fur back as 1872, described the " living glaciers of California." Mr. 1. C. Russell showed " that nine glaciers now exist within the southern rim of the Mono Lake drainage basin ;" and he adds that a larger number are to be found round Maclure, Lyell and Ritter peaks (" Existing glaciers of the United States" in Fifth Ann. Rep. U. S. Geol. Surv., p. 315, Washington, 1885). The late director of the Geological Survey of California, Mr. Whitney, not only did not find any glaciers in the Sierra Nevada,^ but went so far as tf^ deny their exiotence, even ten years after their descriptions by Messrs. Muir and Leconte. His former as- sistant, Mr. Clarence King, afterward geologist-in-charge of the fortieth-parallel explorations, has joined his protest against " the absurdity of applying the word glacier to a snow mass which ap- pears and reaj pears from year to yeu,r " speaking also of " Mr. Muir's vagarie; " (Explor. fortieth Parallel, vol. i, p. 478, 4*°, Washingion, 1 «78). 1 Nevada in Spanish, Nivi in French, represent a fictitious form nivatus, fi-om nix, nivis, snow., which is always applied by the Spaniards to mountains covered with per- petuai snow or glaciers. In South America, fVom the Sierra Nevada dc Santa Marttia, in the northern part of Colombia, to Chiii, we have numerous Sierra Nevada or oniy Nevada. The Sierra Nevada of Spain (Grenada), with its well known glaciers, is celebrated since the time of the Romans and the Moors. Consequently the name Sierra Nevada means a range of mountains with glaciers on their highest part. If Messrs. J. D. Whitney and C. King were conversant with Spanish physical geography, they would have reflected and probably paused before committing themselves to the flat denial of the existence of living glaciers in the Sierra Nevada of California, the very name of it meaning a range of mountains with glaciers. ■ 08 AMERICAN OEOLOOIOAL A ^ Mr. G. Thompson, of the U. S. Geological Survey, made a top- ographical Hurvey of the region about Mount Shasta in 1883. His map is published by Mr. Russell in the Fifth Ann. Eejyort, op- posite p. 330, plate xliv. About a dozen glaciers exist ; live of which are of good size, being several miles in length. Any one who has been in California and has previously seen eitiier any portion of the Alps, or the p]tna, knows well enough, even in look- ing at Mount Shasta from Marysville and all over the Sacramento valley, that it was covered with perpetual snow and consequently with glaciers. But the Geological Survey of California knows bet- ter. In September, 1862, the Director, Mr. J. D. Whitney, accom- panied by his two assistants, Messrs. W. H. Brewer and Clarence King, all three claiming to be old travellers in the Alps of Swit- zerland and the Tyrol, and good experts on the glaciers, ascended Mount Shasta. T je party had "considerable difficulty in crossing over a wide space on which the snow, almost icy in its texture was laid in sharp ridges" (Oeol. Surv. of California, Geology, vol. i, p. 340, 1865). Notwithstanding these snow "difficulties," Mr.Whit- ney and his companions did not discover any glacier ! It was not until eight years later that one of that singular party of non-dis- coverers of glaciers, Mr. C. King, having become geologist-in- charge of the exploration of the 40th parallel, and accompanied by several members of his survej', one of whom was better qualified than himself in his knowledge of the Alpine glaciers, found at last three glaciers. As a matter of course, to excuse Messrs. Whitney and Brewer, as well as himself for their failure of 1862, Mr. King explains " why able scientific observers like Professor Whitney'' and his party should have scaled the mountain without discovering their existence" {Amer. Journ. Sci., 3rd series, vol. i, p. 157, 1871). Such a feat was not to be left uncommemorated, and Mr. Thomp- son very wittily and most appropriately named the longest and first magnitude glacier of Mount Shasta, 3,800 yards in length, and covering an area of 1,900,000 square yards, at an elevation of 9,500 feet above the sea, Whitney glacier^ "in honor of the former State Geologist of California"(Ft/]!/i Ann. Rep. U. S. Geol. Surv., p. 333) . A well deserved tribute due to the man who has declared that there were no actual glaciers on Mount Shasta, nor in the Sierra Neva- da ; and that the "glacial epoch" was only a myth, invented to ex- plain everything in geology. I CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 59 In the Cascade Mountains, glaciers exist at Mounts Rainlci, Hood, Baiter, Jefferson, the Three Sisters, etc. Also splendid and numerous Alpine glaciers cover a part of Alaska. S w XV. Explanation of the Tabular view op American Classi- fication AND Nomenclature. The division in eight grand epochs, or series of the first order, is better balanced and gives a more just view of practical geology, than the old division into four classes : Primary, Transition, Sec- O'.idKry and Tertiary ; or Azoic, Paleeozoic, Mesozoic and Cenozoic ; or only into three great classes : Azoic, Palueozoic and Neozoic. Such divisions are not veil balanced, and their chronology was not established with a sufficient knowledge of the history of the earth. Their use has been confined to museums and theorists ; but for prac- tical purposes, when in the field, or at work at a general geological map of a moderate scale, they are too unequal, too great — except the Tertiary — to be of any help in survej'ing, mapping and classi- fying the rocks met with. They do not correspond any longer to the state of our knowledge. Up to forty years ago it was very well to use such great Vernerian epochs ; but since the disentangle- ment of the older fossiliferous rocks, the extension all over Europe America and a part of Asia, Africa and Australia, of the different systems of strata now well understood and sufficiently known, it is rather out of our time to maintain so incongruous and unbalanced a classification. I have previously in the Explication d'une seconde edition de la carte geologique de la Terre, 4'°, Zurich, 1875, used and explained the division in eight series, as better qualified to unite and conden- sate the different great geological facts as they truly exist in na- ture. The great "New York series" is due entirely to Messrs. Emmons, Vanuxem and Co-rad. Their two other associates in the New York Survey, Messis. ?'ather and Hall, not only did nothing to elucidate the Suratigraphical classification ; but, on the contrary, they have tried very hard, during forty years, to entangle and nul- lify the good observations made by the other members of the sur- vej'. And to refer, as is sometimes the custom among foreign and even some American geologists, the "New York series" to Mr. James Hall, as its author, is not only a gross error, but a great 60 AMERICAN OKOLOOICAL injustice to Emmons, Vanuxcra and Conrad, which oii<^ht to be checlted by all means, and the sooner the better. Since 1868, in my Geology of North America^ chapter ix, " a Synopsis of the History of the progress and discoveries of Geology in Nortlj America," p. 99, 4*", Zurich, I have striven to expose tlie truth, and Billings en« dorsed my efforts in a letter which I have pul)lished in my paper : *' The Taconic system and its position in stratigruphic geology," p. 185 {Proceed. Amer. Acad. Arts and Sciences, vol. xii, Cam- bridge, 1885). Now it is to be hoped that the reference of the "New York series" to Mr. James Hall will cease and be replaced by its true discoverers, Emmons, Vanuxera and Conrad. As subdivisions of the second order, I have given sixteen systems or terrains, all recognizable easily at first sight by any competent geologist all the world over. They exist in North America, beau- tifully developed, from Newfoundland to California. In the third order, the divisi. ns or etages are more numerous and consequently limited in their geographical extension. The Taconic series contains at least eight divisions, the New York se- ries, nine divisions, etc., etc. It is a little difficult to find their Iiomotaxial equivalents with the divisions of the same order in Europe, Asia and Australia. Some are, however, remarkably iden- tical, palceontologically as well as lithologically and strutigraphi- cally, on both sides of the Atlantic. The contemporaneousness is sometimes very striking and astonishing. The divisions of the fourth order, called groups or sub-etages are all special and confined to one-quarter, or to one-third at most, of the United States and Canada and often even much less. Their equivalents outside of America are more or less doubtful and never to be entirely relied upon. Generally, a group or sub-kage is limited to a great physical geographical division such as the Mis- souri basin, the Great Basin, the AUeghanies, the Great Lakes, the Rocky Mountains, the Atlantic coast, the Gulf of Mexico, the Pacific coast, etc. I have not put all the groups existing and already recognized in North America iu the " Tabular View," because a great deal remains to be done in more than half of the country before con- structing such a table with anything like permanency. Special monographs for each system are wanted in many cases before fixing the groups. The divisions of the fifth order, called beds or couches^ or assises^ ; i-Tl OLA891KICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. di . i^ ti or strata, or hand, or zone, or .section, ftlwftys limited to n part only of ti grojit geographical division and entirely local, vary accord- ing to places in regard to their importance and stratigraphical values. Some are confined to a few square miles and even one or two quarries or sections. In the "Tabular View" I have indicat- ed very slightly in a special column tliat fifth order, because each part of the country and almost each state or province need such special subdivisions, often entirely limited to each one. In order to show what they are, I have written on the "Tabular View" two or three exam[)les only. In the very narrow St John basin in New Brunswick, Mr. G. F. Matthew, who has worked out so well the St. John formation of the Middle Taconic, gives for the succession of members, first, five groups or sub-etages, numbered 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 ; and each group is 8ul)divided into belts called by him "bands" or "zones," or "sections." For instance. No. 1 is divided into bands a, b, c and d, each one characterized by special fossils and a special lithology. In Texas Mr. II. T. Ilill has lately shown that the Neocomlan can be divided into two groups or sub-etuges, called "Lower or Comanche Peak Division," also called afterward "Fredericksburg Division," and "Upper or Washita Division;" and then in each of those groups he gives subdivisions in beds, such as "Hippurites limestone," etc. In the tabular view, I have numbered the four beds of the Comanche Peak group. In New York, I have also numbered the five beds or the subdivisions of the Lower Ilelderberg. I have not indicated in the tabular view any groups or division of the fourth order for the Lower Taconic, the Upper Carbonifer- ous or Coal Measures, the Dyas, Trias, Jura and Upi)er Tertiary, because the study of these strata has not yet been carried out with sufHcient details. However, the existence of the Rhetic, Sinemu- rian and Purbeckian indicated in the American Trias and Jura, shows already that important general groups may be recognized and created in those systems. SyNCHUONISM AND HoMOTAXIS. The synchronism and homotaxis of the. divisions of the second order or systems, for the whole northern hemisphere, can be easily established, only the work should be done by practical geologists made well acquainted by studies in the field, not only with a more or less extensive country, but also with vast regions of the Old 62 AMKKICAN OKULOGICAL and Now World ; nn iicquiiement vciy seldom attained, owing to the didlciilties to l)e overcome. Often a geologist, nfler u tolerably' good study of a stnto, or two or three states and territories of the United States, thinks that he can synchronize easily two or three systems of strata, not only all over North America, but also with Kin'o[)e. Not knowing practi- cally the geology of the greatest |)art of North America, and being totally ignorant of the geology of Kurope, except what he can learn through a Manual of Omlngy or even special memoirs published on the question, he is inclined to generalize and give opinions which are always more or less erroneous and superllcial. But even more : some geologists go to Europe, visit collections in the great mu- seums, and even go a little in the field, and after three, four or twelve months of travel, believe that they know sufficiently the geology of Europe to make good synchronism between American and European formations. And, vice versa, for European geolo- gists visiting America. Such observers have oidy a very imperfect knowledge, and are almost sure to make great mistakes; for it is not one or two months, or even one or two years, which are re- quired for obtaining a pretty good practical acquaintance with European and American geology, but at least five, ten and even fifteen years passed in practical work on eacli continent. Even that is not enough to know well and be able to handle skilfully all the questions of homotaxis, but only some of them ; for the geological systems are too numerous and too complicated to be well studied by a single geolog' t. It is very easy and too common to speak at random either of the synchronism of the different systems between America and Europe, or of the impossibility of doing it, saying; "a system which is universal is artificial." Facts, practical facts well ob- served in the field, are what is wanted ; and any one who has passed his life in practical work, will always say, that the repetition of almost identical, or at least very similar phenomena in every de- partment of which geological science is composed, is not only of common occurrence, but the rule all the world over. The differ- ences only strike the mind of the superficial geologists; similari- ties, on the contrary, are taken eagerly and with all their true meaning, usefulness and generalities by the specialists. Mr. G. K. Gilbert in a paper on "Tlie work of the International Congress of Geologists" {Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci. at New York, .'Si CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENOLATURK. 63 iV Aiijr. 10, 18H7, Salem, 1887), wliich contiiins 8om« good ndvlce nnd i8 H oointiKMulalilu utlbrt to put {{cologistH on tlicii* guard against aiithoiitalive dictation and the tyranny of a too uniform taxonomy, spealis of "tlio fallacy of a world-wide unity of geologic KyHtems ;" and sayH aluo that, ^^there does not exist a world-wide Hystcm nor a world-wide group, but every Bystem and every group is local." As the author of the "Geological Map of the World" I have to any a few words. Not ordy the systems or divisions of the sec- ond order are easily distinguisliahle in every part of the northern hemisphere; but it is even not difllcult to work them out in the southern hemisphere, although the similarities are a little less strik- ing. 1 must say, that the obscurities and certain confusions are duo more to the inal)ility of the observers, than to the facts which exist in the Held ; facts, which require only to be properly made out by good practical geologists, as it lias been proved again and again in South America, southern Africa, Australia and New Zealand. That the elages or divisions of the third order are local is very true, as 1 have said before, but I cannot refrain from saying that there are a few even of them which are also almost world-wide ; for instance the Keuper, the Lias, the Neocomian, and very likely others. Mr. Gill)ert "insists that a system which is universal is artifi- cial." .... "Take for example the Jurassic. It is a natural system in Europe." .... "at the west (United States) the rocks called Jurassic merge with those called Trlassic. In India, Med- licott tells us, a Jurassic fauna occurs at the summit of a great nat- ural system containing a Permian fauna near its base. In New Zealand, according to Ilutton, a continuous rock system, dissev- ered by great unconformities from the system, bears at top fossils resembling those of the lower Jurassic, and lower down fossils of Trlassic facies. To establish a Jurassic system in either of these countries it is necessary to divide a natural system ; and a Jurassic system thus established would be necessarily artificial." All this argumentation is based upon the incorrect notion, that the Jurassic system in Europe is limited by "stratigraphic break" and "great unconformities." In the Jura Mountains, where the typical Jurassic system has been founded, and taken as a standard, the Trlassic and tlie Jurassic systems are not separated by any break or unconformities of any sort, and according to Mr. Gilbert's phraseology merge into one another. The Neocomian is also in »i AMEaiCAN QEOLOOICAL I I concordance of stratification over the Jurassic in many parts of Europe. So we liave exactly tlie same relations of rocks so far as breaks are concerned in Europe, in America, in Asia and in New Zealand. A great system io marked not simply by "stratigrar^'.iic break" or "great unconformity" which are always local, but by differences in fauna and differences in lithology, which are a great deal more general ar 1 world- wide, at least for the fauna. The examples chosen by Mr. Gilbert are unfortunate. In the western part of the United States, the Jurassic does not merge into the Triassic, but is as fully distinct palteontologically and litholog- ically as in the Jura mountains, at least all through the 85th par- allel of latitude where I have discovered them in 1853. In India according to Medlicott, the Gondwana system is probably of "flu- viatile origin," consequently an exception like the Weaklen ; and in New Zealand the sequence of marine fauna is correct, and shows the generality of the palaeontological rules extending even to the antipodes. As to " the Chico-Tcjon series as partly Eocenal and partly Cre- taceal," it is a repetition of a grent mistake, the two formations be- longing to the Lower Tertiary system and not to the Cretaceous, as I have shown repeatedly. The Geological Map ok Europe. In a previc s paper "Notes a I'occasion du prochain congres geologique international, etc." (BtiUetin /Soc. Geol. de France, tome XII, p. 517, Mai, 1884, Paris), I have shown some of the great objections and inconveniences against the publication of a "■Geo- logical Map of Europe" by the Congress. Mr. Gilbert opposes also that publication, giving excellent reasons. He sa^-s : "I also regard it as ill-advised that the Congress undertook the prepara- tion of a map of Europe, for that — if more than a work of com- pilation — is a work ot classification." Time has already shown the exactness and importance of my obje(dions and criticism. The international commission admit now, that it will be only an essay — fs I said in 1884 — instead of being a standard map. The number of years, first fixed at four or six years, for its completion and full issue, is now extended indefinite- ly ; after seven years not a single one of the forty-nine sheets hav- ing yet been published. i ^ L CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 65 i ^4. A first difflculty, which appears to be insurmountable on account of its nature, i6 that the International Commission for the geolog- ical map cannot be complete, at any meeting or session, although composed of only eight members. Besides, the Congress is asked repeatedly to leave almost all the questions relating to the map to the discretion of the commission, and finally the commission itself is obliged to leave all the solutions of classification, coloring, etc., in the hands of the Direction, composed only of Messrs. Beyrich and Hauchcorne, at Berlin, or more exactly of Mr. Beyrich alone, Mr. Hauchcorne acting only as assistant for the material and man- ual part of the work. In reality, the geological map of Europe by the International Congress will be the work of a single man, Mr. Beyrich, placed, very much to the detriment of the future progress of European geology, under the shield and responsibility of the Congress. It is the greatest act of authoritative dictation and tyrannical im- position, to which the science of geology has ever been submitted. ^ As the matter has become personal instead of international, it is just to say a few words of the man and his plans. Mr. Hein- rich E. Beyrich is not well prepared for such direction ; his works are only palaeontological, biographical, bibliographical and on the stratigraphy of a special question very limited, the stratigraphy of the Tertiary series of German} He has absolutely no practice in dealing with geological maps of any kind, embracing great or even small area, nor with the classification and nomenclature of any geo- logical system, except the Tertiary. As to Mr. Hauchcorne, Di- rector of the School of Mines of Prussia, he is only an administra- tor, almost without a record in geology. When those two savants undertook the geological map of Europe for the Congress, they did not know what difficulties were in store for them, and Prussian- like, they iiave supplemented their deficiencies by a complete silence ; never answering any inquiries of any member of the Congress, or ' The map has been conceded to tlic iniblisliers, T>. Reimer & Co., of Berlin, as a per- petual pi perty; witli the un4«r8taii(ling that they may issue new editions every ten years — if asked IV" by tlii" Congress,— also that they may publish a hypsometvio map, and a reduction or Tahleau iiy geologist to publit^h a geological map of Kuroi)e; no editor, in the future, will ever think for a moment to compete with Reimer & Co. It is simply a monopoly of the geologi<',al ma)) of Eui-ope. an act which cannot be too much stigmatized as an attempt against the liberty of all original ob- eervers, and which will weigh heavily on the future i)rogre.ss of geology. » ■ .»' 66 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL of the Commission nor even of the General Secretary of the Inter- national Commission, an unmistakable proof that the map is, and will remain, Bey rich's geological map of Europe. Mr. Beyrich really cares only about three or four points. First, to have the Prussian division of the Rhenish Devonian used and accepted ; second, to maintain the Jura divisions of von Buch in three great etages; and third, to see his own divisions and name of Oligocene accepted and placed on the general map of Europe. To take the Rhenish Devonian as the type for all Europe is a mis- take ; its great development is abnormal and an exception — just as the enormous Luxembourg Lias is another exception — and what is wanted for a whole continent as a type is a formation which is generally found in eveiy part of it, with the same or nearly the same characteristics. Dumont, in his Carte geologique de I'Eurojje^ 1855-57, has already attempted the extension all over Europe of the Rhenish Devonian divided in three great etages, and Mr. Bey- rich's actual attempu will not be attended bj' better success. It is a move in the wrong direction, analogous to the publication of the " Geological map of Europe" by Murchison and Nichols in 1856, with the special purpose of an;iihilating the Cambrian of Sedgwick, coloring all the strata containing the Primordial fauna, the second fauna and the third fauna as Silurian. The division of the Jura into three great etages, as proposed by von Buch, does not satisfy eitlier the palaeontology, or the li- thology and orography of the Jurassic system all over Europe, and more especially in the Jura Mountains. If the scale of the map of Mr. Beyi'ich were at least 1 : 320,000, the Jura might be divid- ed into four great etages (Lias, Lower Oolite, Oxfordian, Upper Oolite) ; but with a scale of 1 : 500,000, the Jura can onl}' be di- vided into two great etages (1st, Lias — Lower Oolite; and, 2nd, Oxfordian — Upper Oolite) . As to the Oligocene, that special creation of Mr. Beyrich, it is good and may be used with advantage for the upper part of the Lower Tertiary system. The tendency mauilested at Berlin to suppress the Dyas as a system, and to join it as an etage or division of the third order only of the Carboniferous, is simply a move made by persons wanting in practical knowledge, and which has not the smallest chance to remain for any length of time in geology, because it is at variance with many plain facts in England, France, Germany, i i,*: CLASSIFICATION AKD NOMENCLATURE. 67 i ^t Russia, the United States, etc. It is a momentary opposition pi'orapted by personal rivalry and jealousy. The Dyas will take care of itself. It is to be regretted that the geological map of Europe of the International Congress, after :t had been voted and accepted, was not given to Austria instead of Prussia. Austria was the promoter of it, and in the hands of Messrs. Franz Ritter von Hauer, Ed- mund Mojsisovics and Melchior Neuraayr, it would have been placed at least under the direction of geologists having great prac- tice, as well in making general and special geological maps, as in handling classifications. The whole affair was arranged at the meeting of Bologna, and Italy wants too much to please Prussia to I the geological map of Europe go to its proper place at Vi- enna, where is the best geological school and centre now existing all the world over. As to poor France, the V(b victis was rudely applied, even in geology. XVI. Conclusion. American geological classification and nomenclature not only have not been benefited or iielped in any way by Messrs. J. Hall, J. D. Dana, W. E. Logan, J. D. Whitney, J. S. Newberry and their followers ; but, on the contrary, they have been built up, little by little, against them and notwithstanding their most strenuous opposition and obstruction. If their opinions had been accepted American geology would he now fifty years behind our actual knowledge ; and instead of having the "Tabular View" pre- sented in tills paper, we should have one without the Taconic, the Devonian 'le Dyas, the Trias, the Jura, the Neocomian, the Eo- cene and C^uatenmy (California), the Ice age and actual glaciers I That is to say, American geology would have remained stationary with as few and insignilicant changes and modifications as possi- ble, where it was in 1837. "When I took in hand the Taconic question at the earnest request of Barrande and Emmons, it was under rather discourag- ing circumstances. Dr. Einmons had just left Albany for North Carolina, September, 1860, never to return. Barrande was too far away ; he waw also advanced in age and was too busy with his own w'ljrk in Boliemia to pay any more attention to the Taconic, 68 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL after the publication of our joint paper of 1860 and of his Docu- ments anciens el nouveau stir la faune primordiale et le systSme Taconiqne en Amerique in 1861. Billings was not to be relied upon, on account of an incurable illness, joined to his peculiar position in the Canada geological survey, then in the hands of Messrs. Logan and Hunt ; and as to Colonel Jewett, he refused all his life to publish anything of his notes and observations on geology. So I was left alone against the united opposition of the old ad- versaries of the Taconic system. If the opposition to Emmons during eighteen years, 1842-1860, was of a nature verging on persecution, it was much more so with me. For I had to sustain the whole weight of the most unscrupulous opposition, not only on the Taconic, but also on the Mountain limestone of the Sierra de Sandia in New Mexico, the Dyas of the Colorado Chiquito and Ne'raslia City, tlie Trias of tlie Canadian river and of the Colo- rado Cliiqnito, the Jurassic system of the Tucumcari area. Canon Blanco, Cuesta, Lagiina. Inscription rocks, and of Zuni, the Neo- comian of the false Washita and Canadian rivers, tlie Tertiary of Fort Tejon a^vl Chico creelt, the Quaternary auriferous gravels and the age of the apparition of gold in Califoi-nia, the copper-bearing roclis of Keweenaw Point and the Lalie Superior sandstone, and finally on the Ice ag-e. The opposition to Dr. Emmons was mere child's play, in com- parison with wliat Ims been done against me. My observations ex- tending from Quebec to Los Angeles, and from Lake Superior to Nebraslca, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, have all been flatly and systematically contradicted and denied, never by direct ob- servations made in the field, but simply by guesses, false determi- nations of fossils and erroneous notions on American geology. My name has been ruled out of the list of authors on American geology and palaeontology, by the successor of Agassiz as Profes- sor of geology at the Lawrence Scientific school of Harvard Uni- versity and who is at the same time Secretary of the Agassiz Museum, in wiiieh are preserved many of my collections, made in America and in Europe ; and «ome of the rarest and best speci- mens of fossils I have met within my explorations {List of Amer- ican authors in Geology and Paloiontology, by J. D. Whitney. Li- brary of Harvard University, Bibliographical contributions ; edited W^i. CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 69 by Justin Winsor, No. 15, republished from the Bulletin of Har- vard University, 4'°, Cambridge, Mass., 1882). To all the adversaries of Dr. Emmons a dozen at least of other opponents have been added, always under the lead of Messrs. James Hall, James D. Dana and J. S. Newberry. Never has such a united opposition been offered to the worlds of a single geolo- gist, during so long a period, almost forty years. It is unpar- alleled and unique not only on account of its duration, but also for its character of exceptional bitterness and animosity unequalled in geology. Undisturbed in their assertions, my adversaries have the field all to themselves, and with iron rod in hand they have assumed the whole control of American geology ; denying plain facts, giving false determination and false identifications of fossils, incorrect sections, geological maps with false and incomplete classifications, and nomenclatures so imperfect as to be monstrously mutilated. They have gone so far in their blind opposition, as to use as tools against me specimens collected by me and my field notes written during my explorations from the Mississippi river to the Pacific shores in 1853-54, and put honestly into their hands by my friends. Generals A. A. Humphreys and A. W. Whipple, in order to secure my discoveries. Messrs. James Hall and W. P. Blake have erroneously denied the most careful, diflScult and sagacious observations I have made, aggravating as much as it was in their power the wrong done me by the tyrannical and most unjustifiable action of the famous Jef- ferson Davis, who as Secretary of War deprived me of the right of making my final report — a process absolutely without precedent in tlje history of geology, and which places James Hall, "W. P. Blake and Jefferson Davis in their true and unenviable lisht. There is not a single question in American geology which has not been submitted to their deadly influence. Even the history of dis- coveries has been falsified with the greatest ignorance and parti- ality, and all that in order to please their own fancies, and to shield their errors and mistakes. They have treated all questions with- out any knowledge whatever of coniparative geology, comparative palaeontology or comparative lithology, not only in Europe and other parts of the world, but even within North America. Dis- courtesy marks the whole proceeding ; and the blindness of jeal- 70 AMERICAN OBOLOaiOAL ousy has seldom if ever — in science — shown such an array of rep- r< hensible acts, and persistence in wrong-doing. Two geologists alone have had to sustain during forty-five years the repeated assault of the most influential scientific period- ical, The American Journal of Science, led by its principal editor Mr. J. D. Dana, with the support of Mr. J. Hall and a whole staff of contributors. Sir Roderick L. Murchison among them. What an attempt against the liberty of opinions and observations, and truly against the progress of geology 1 Notwithstanding such a powerful obstacle, American geology has progressed, thanks to a few independent and honest observers, who after all have never been entirely extinguished, nor paralyzed by the autocratic dictation and manoeuvring of a dominant party whose rules have been to oppose and even suppress all the observa- tions not originated or nursed among its members. I have done all that was in my power to call the attention of geologists, as well in America as in Europe, to many of the most important questions offered by the North American continent ; and if I have not entirely succeeded in freeing American geology of the dictations of an aristocracy so baneful and demoralizing, which has opposed almost all the progress, and prevented as much as it could the expression of all original opinions and observa- tions, I hope, however, that I have not suffered in vain, and that the time has now come when all geologists, on the American con- tinent, will be able to observe and state their results without fear of being ostracized and treated as a paria, as was the common fate of Dr. E. Emmons and myself. I do not complain, however, for after all it is no ordinary compliment to have aroused the jealous rancor and ire of all the geologists who have contrived to monopolize and control in their personal interests the researches executed in both hemispheres, and to have passed my life, almost without re- muneration of any sort, working all the time for truth, progress, honesty and justice. I must add, as a great compensation, that I have enjoyed the confidence, the trust, and often the intimate friendship of all the best and most honest geologists and palaeontologists. Quoting onl}' the dead : Barrande, Lyell, Louis Agasslz, Ebenezer Emmons, Alcide d'Orbigny, Pictet, Deshayes, d'Oinalius d'Halloy, Andre Dumont, de Koninck, Boue, de Verneuil, Delesse, Fournet, CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 71 A Griiner, Edouard Lartet, Gcrvais, Jukes, Jolin Phillips, Thomas Davidson, John Morris, Thomas Wright, Charles T. Jackson, S. Morton, T. Conrad, Thomas Oldham, Stoliczka, Auerbach, Grewingk, Oppel, von Hochsletter, von Haast, Haidinger, Thur- man, Merian, Escher von der Linth, Studcr, Heer, Bartolomeo Gastaldi, and Quintino Sella. Besides, I have the privilege and the rare honor of having received approbation, advice, and even public quotations of ray researches, at the beginning of my career as a geologist, from such great and original observers as Alexandre Brongniart, Constant Frevost, F. Louis A. Cordier, Alexandre von Humboldt, Leopold von Buch and Jean de Charpentier. ji.iyk 79 AMERICAN GEOLOGICAL 1-3 O o "I (i3 n H o -si !^ O H O (» < U o O pa < w'2'E OR H £ c ests s- 03 fe a, * a o OS to H (A S 2S o a v -a c m > 'S u o S > o ;: be to a X Ed 44 u u a M a 90 s u H ^- i! H O H 00 (-1 n y?2 "J, MM i,a •2 3 u = ®t 1*1 _L 0-' .5 5* S a s •3 5 c «> u Q 5 H w S; 00 io6 •ujapOM •JIIA a f o 01 B S 2 5 o bo n 4J « ^ b J 53 I "t O 'S o 6 I s aj 2 ^; IJ2,0 1§ 'E a o o I ^ s," &; s E a o o u .a a o o u St . s a t- cs ^■^ II CO I ■^a«!ia9i -iiA A ^^jKIBIIl^^^ CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 78 iA 1 H e4 D H •a) iJ U H o Q < ctt a o > BQ h« U " O O OB O H 3. «^ So 00 ^1 01 I a X 3 9 ^ S bb 'E" a o "3 a< 3 O a ie (» ^^ »,£ I « 3- el o o.o ■3 a a IS H o 1 a a 1? o3 On « S5 OS B ti — lej S « •t|ii| w 2 c ci ©.tJ.SoP « I £0 J, 03 13 3iJ Ho 9 a * . "o H OD 00 i ^ S B s 3 o u hi » s b QO g •;fa«puoo8g "I A •(tC-6l8I) sauiBf putt Jlooo^ojiH 9uo}8putt8 pan M8;( "A 74 a < u y> o 'A O < o H < en CO .i.tti •M -i 5=§ I'll o«| • O ' • * • en ?-..' i. s-" ^tf Id ^ '"■S * J 2 = 5 11 OS K « '5 c S « — CO Ob >. • CO 1/ c • : 3 : rt • : q; t S 2 I. a --a St; a« f CO a; 1 111 11 'J • 5 X . - « S U 01^ be . c _: = 1, o .— = ui j< s r:■- '. r r* = — s •0 c ~- : § - i' H ilk? li 4^ o y. oassu 5oa.= 1^5 SSO v-.^o 3 r^ttii yy '^— v^- Mrt ~r ~*- '*^-v-*-' — , s^-V^*- .2 ^5 fe \ 2 = ^ I .E ^ *^ • ^ CO O '• - 'o S " * g .5 9 ; ■^ — — ^- ( ■5-35 ; ** v^ «■» ^ ^ =3 fl * X > U U o' S 2 . , . O •S -^ a ' -n ;= _- _0 H ;^ ? *- lb ;„ ^ ■W o = c o ^~. XA $1 h 2 3 2. ;^ -g Q 1, § O (JO 5 Ik • CO I-! 3 '-' X i: • • 5 : c : Si • - b go .« 05 * S £ g . 1" S3 ■ : : H ; ; i s s . 1 1 r« . S u s t,.2 9 a 1 = 1 1 7 c C > c a; J : * u . 3 : 03 a o c 5 ■ • S • o : • .2 • d a. B a ji O 5 0— = a) — C^ 1) 3 2 a s • ? • a. •- o ^ o ~ • ^ ^ • ■— • o U) S ►J ^ :? U . 1 -: X • '■?. '^ ! ^ U ^^ 2^ CO 3 T a — ?i •< :£ • si ;-c2 o'H .if P §5 o s s| II = i -^ .o OQ '^^ o £ ^ c 5^ in O i .5> ".S « — ■3 y? zu Cfl 1 = CO tl 5 C«"^ u yj ~ cri i cri .3 «*j .J A 1. 5, — ^H Jj •(et-ii 81) P : (lino pui! suoiu lua 'luaxnuijji L isg •snojojiu oqiwo "A I 3i.lOA.W3>i 1 I 1 1 ^ / A ^.. ^'^.:^'.i^m^i^tim: ^^.^'jmrn^M { \4 in CI-ASSiriCATION AND NOMENCLATURE. 7ft 2- t M ^ ^ « o r U H as* CO u O . -H a 03 /, .9 «• S ? 3 s "3 -r « (A o • o ; o V I' . «^ '^ •* 7t ^^ J3 — ** 3 i: *"_. ^ iS V = a o l.H1l^T •via It 'J ■a a C3 ^ u s o a o S a a o ♦A a 03 "BOO (0 '^ o o o Oi 3 O Si To a 0! a o ■a o a, a a ■& 3 OS "3 a 03 :4 ^5 '" o 9 a c a ■2^.2 03 ^ To ■J3 ■r : 03*; its u. s — C CS = N C u » s 03 S o •»'^! <2e'-i3 .s 'n CO s-s .2-3 t; a m ^ '■""1 ** rj ai "h A o •-5 O Hr ^i' ■ s o a ^ S| s t^ ~ ^ ^ ^ CO a s- o O N O I «■« ' ■- e a> 03 C""- f -;; t: «o .^ -:=-§ = o = 2 **'- -S S ^ o 03:-5 "* o a o » ~ 5 .2 '3 s •ojuosux 11 o u o o. 3