1883.] 671 [Claypole. 



Without laying too much stress on a single species, it may be worth 

 consideration whether or not the Panama conglomerate of Report III may 

 be of approximately the same age as the Kingsmill white sandstone above 

 described. 



The following points of resemblance may be noted : 



1. The Kingsmill sandstone is often conglomeratic. 



3. The Kingsmill sandstone contains abundance of flat lenticular quartz 

 pebbles. I have never seen a pebble of any other shape in it. This is a 

 distinguishing feature of the Panama rock according to Mr. Carll and Mr. 

 Ashburner. 



3. The J^ingsmill sandstones contain abundance of fossils, among which, 

 in one locality at least, is found in profusion ScMzodusrhombeus, one of the 

 three characteristic species of the Panama rock. 



The Sub-Olean or Sub-Garland conglomerate of Messrs. Carll and Ash- 

 burner is the only other conglomerate in that part of Pennsylvania holding 

 similar flat pebbles. See Rep. III. 



I have not yet identified with certainty either of the other three species 

 mentioned by Prof. Hall and Mr. Carll to occur near Panama in the 

 conglomerate, but so far as I have yet observed ScMzodus rhomheus is 

 strictly limited in Perry county to this single bed of sandstone not exceed- 

 ing ten feet in thickness. A scarce form, usually imperfect, much resem- 

 bles 8. contractus ( Cypricardia contraeta), and may prove to be so. The 

 Gasteropods are in so ill preserved a condition that their identification is 

 attended with great difiiculty. 



If any importance be attached to this suggestion, it only remains to point 

 out the horizon of the Kingsmill sandstone, which admits of no doubt, 

 although it may admit of slight diffei'ences of opinion. As mentioned at the 

 beginning of this note, it lies near the base of the great " Ponent " seriet. 

 of Prof. Rogers. It must, therefore, be about the top of the Chemung or 

 the base of the Catskill of Xew York, or perhaps better in what we may 

 call the "Chemung-Catskill passage beds." It is not probable that the 

 palaeontological evidence, when complete, will warrant the placing of this 

 sandstone and its associated strata fully within either of these two great 

 groups of New York. 



The Kingsmill standstone cannot of course be a continuation, unchanged, 

 of the Panama conglomerate for, according to the testimony of Mr. Carll 

 and Mr. Ashburner, the latter graduates down into soft shales when fol- 

 lowed a few miles to the south-east of Panama. But it may be a bed on the 

 same or nearly the same horizon, and the deposit of a sea tenanted by the 

 same species. It may even be a continuation of the same bed taking on its 

 sandy nature again in consequence of changed conditions. 



It only remains to add that, though the three or four species above enu- 

 merated form the whole of the known fauna of the Panama conglomerate* 



* The list of fossils from the Panama conglomerate or its associated conglom- 

 erates has apparently been increased since the publication ot the Geology ot 

 New York, by the addition of the following three species ; 



Edmondia cequimarginalis = Cardinia cequimarginalis Win. 



Allorisma Hannibalensis = Gramviysia Hannibalensis Shumard. 



Sanguinolites clavulus Hall. 



