132 ANNALS NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 



enough to discredit the correctness of the sedimentary theory and to 

 force us to look elsewhere for an explanation of the origin of these forma- 

 tions. 



Sedimentary Aspect of the Ore Beds 



That the general appearance of the ore beds would give the impression 

 that they must be regular sedimentary iroii-ore beds laid down as the 

 advocates of sedimentation suggest, cannot be doubted. Clean contacts, 

 lens-shaped deposits, widespread occurrence, separated individual iron- 

 coated oolites, non-ferruginous sandstone and limestone beds overlying 

 some of the ore beds and underlying others, all would tend to give weight 

 to the sedimentary hypothesis. Before the theory can be considered as 

 proved, however, it must account for certain conditions that appear to the 

 writer irreconcilable with any theory based upon original deposition. 



Consequences of Sedimentary Theory 



In the first place, let us apply the sedimentary theory to the oolitic 

 hematites that are so common in New York, Virginia, West Virginia, 

 Kentucky, Ohio and Wisconsin. Under the sedimentary theory, it is 

 assumed that the Clinton Sea was heavily charged with iron salts in solu- 

 tion, and that, as sediments were being laid down along the shallow and 

 gently inclined shore slopes, myriads of sand grains under the influence 

 of considerably agitated waters were coated with layer after layer of 

 iron oxide, which in many cases alternated with silica. These iron-coated 

 grains finally accumulated into beds in the same manner as any sand 

 stratum would accumulate and were then cemented by more iron and 

 calcite into solid beds or layers of sedimentary rock like any other sedi- 

 mentary deposit. 



For the sake of argument, let us assume that such conditions did exist. 

 If the sea-water contained enough iron in solution successfully to coat 

 grains of sand until they formed a bed several feet in thickness, would it 

 not be reasonable to suppose that all sediments laid down simultaneously 

 would be coated, impregnated or at least stained with iron? Would not 

 all lenses of clay and shale and limestone be completely saturated with 

 the same iron-bearing sea-water that coated the mass of oolites? Would 

 it be possible for any portion of the shore deposits along the entire length 

 of the Clinton Sea to have escaped without leaving permanent evidence 

 of the presence of such large quantities of iron in solution in the sea- 

 water — iron sufficient to cause deposits within a comparatively short 

 period extending for nearly two thousand miles along the shore, many 

 miles out to sea and in some cases many feet in thickness ? 



