No. 2.] MACFARLANE — CANADIAN STRATIGRAPHY. 95 



After this examination I thiuk it can reasonably be submitted 

 that these new data are altogether insufficient to destroy the 

 confidence which many have heretofore placed in the conclusions 

 of Sir W. E. Logan and in the labours of those who worked 

 under him during the last thirty years of his life. If laborious 

 and painijtakiug " study of the actual stratigraphy in the field " 

 is to count for anything, it is no discredit to Mr. Selwyn to say 

 that his work in this respect is far outweighed by that performed 

 by Sir William. Further, we all know that the closing years of 

 his life, even after his official connection with the Survey ceased, 

 were devoted to a re-examination of the Eastern Townships rocks 

 and to the completion of his map. Surely all this ought not to 

 be thrown aside as useless work. Surely Sir William, had he 

 lived, would have had something to say in these days in defence 

 of his opinions. Although he is gone from us, it is surely our 

 duty to take care that justice is done him, and I contend that it 

 would be only an act of simple justice to his memory to give to 

 the world the results of his labours, just in the shape which they 

 attained at his death. Apart altogether from his theoretical 

 conclusions, the correctness of which Mr. Selwyn disputes, the 

 observations of Sir William and his assistants, as to the actual 

 phenomena exhibited by the rocks of south-eastern Quebec, have 

 a practical value to the country, and to all future observers, 

 which I conceive it to be the duty of the Survey to put on record. 



When we consider the very slender foundation of new material 

 upon which Mr. Selwyn's views regarding the Quebec group are 

 built, it would seem that the conclusions he has arrived at are, 

 to a very large extent, theoretical, and therefore just as little 

 entitled to immediate acceptance as those of others who have 

 written upon the subject. In reviewing Mr. Selwyn's conclusions, 

 I shall attempt to state them as briefly and honestly as possible, 

 and I shall first refer to those which from my own point of view 

 appear to be well founded. 



1. The principal feature of Mr. Selwyn's essay is of course 

 the new view he takes as to the stratigraphy of the Quebec 

 group. The order, in age, of its different members he main- 

 tains is just the reverse of that indicated by Sir W. E. Logan ; 

 the fossiliferous belt or L^vis formation is newer than the more 

 crystalline rocks to the south-east, and the latter are probably of 

 Cambrian age. Now although I cannot see that Mr. Selwyn 

 has brought forward any new and adequate proof of the correct 



