RAYMOND: CORRELATION OF THE ORDOVICIAX STRATA. 205 



the railroad or highway southwestward from Kegel, one continues to 

 find C yclocrinites as the common fossil until the coarse-grained, white 

 limestone of the Wassalem is reached. After crossing the outcrop 

 of this formation, the beds alcove are similar to those lielow, though 

 with less shale, and still full of the Cyclocrinites. 



Cyclocrinites seems to be confined very largely to the district west 

 of the longitude of Reval. It is reported by Schmidt from the Jewe 

 at Jewe and from the ^Vesenberg. At Jewe I succeeded in finding a 

 few small specimens of Coclosphaeridium cyclocrinophihim, and this 

 is probably the fossil which Schmidt had seen. At the quarries at 

 Wesenberg I saw no Cyclocrinites, though I looked for it particularly, 

 especially on my second visit, after I had collected many specimens 

 at Kegel and in the loose blocks on Dago. It is therefore, I think, 

 safe to assert that Cyclocrinites is a very rare fossil, if present at all, 

 at ^Yesenberg. 



StoUey reports no species from the quarries at AYesenberg, though 

 he visited that locality, and also had access to the material collected 

 by Schmidt (in Dorpat). Stolley (51) described or reported five 

 species, Cyclocrinites balficus, C. schmidti, C. mickwitzi, C. roemeri, and 

 C. spasskii, from Esthonia, all from the region southwest of Reval, 

 and in the strata above the Wassalem. 



At the United States National JMuseum I have seen specimens 

 collected by Professor Schuchert at Wesenberg while in company with 

 Akademiker Schmidt, and which are labeled Cyclocrinites spasskii. 

 These specimens are none of them spherical, though some of them 

 might be interpreted as fragments of spheres. Moreover, they do not 

 show the surface structures of Cvclocrinites, and thev do show that if 

 they were originally spherical, they were not hollow spheres, but had a 

 structure extending nearly to the center, as in Coclosphaeridium. I, 

 myself, collected many similar specimens, as they are very common at 

 Wesenberg. They are certainly not Cyclocrinites, and probably not 

 Coclosphaeridium, but this identification, which was probably made 

 by Professor Schmidt, explains the listing of Cyclocrinites from Wesen- 

 berg. 



Summarizing what has been said on the preceding pages, it appears 

 that: — 



1st, the fauna of the strata above the Wassalem is more like that of 

 the Kegel than that of the Wesenberg. 



2nd, that the typical Wesenberg fauna is not found in the same 

 region as the typical Kegel fauna, but that both the Wesenberg and 

 the Kegel rest upon the Jewe and are followed by the Lyckholm. 



