106 JULES MARCOU ON THE TACONIC OF GEORGIA 



at first to study very minutely and patiently every square yard, stratigraphically as well 

 as paleontologically and lithologically, at all the localities or special points presenting 

 puzzles or anomalies; and, if the results are not entirely and fully satisfactory, we must 

 not be too hasty in giving an explanation and in synchronizing with groups of strata re- 

 garded as typical. Nothing is so easy as to explain by faults, foldings, transverse up- 

 throw, dislocations, overturns, overlajis, troughs, etc., but the true difficulties remain 

 untouched notwithstanding, and we are obliged to return later to the slow process of 

 patiently repeated observations, on the spot, turning and re-turning every fact, neglect- 

 ing nothing and trying to explain rationally all that do not agree with the too hasty con- 

 clusions first arrived at. 



However, as in all sciences, one good and original observer is able to combat all others, 

 and, after all, the efforts of combined and very strong opposition only temporarily pre- 

 vent the truth from being accepted. Their triumph is of short duration even if it extend 

 through forty years and more, as is the case with the Taconic system. 



Dr. Emmons discovered in 18.38 the oldest series of sediment, which he described in 

 1842 as a special system independent of all others.^ At first no fossils were discovered, 

 but two years later, fossils peculiar to it were found, and the "Taconic system" was fi- 

 nally proposed as forming the base or fii-st step of the column of formations, in which 

 geologists have divided the stratigraphical history of the earth. 



From that moment, the most active membei's of the " Association of American Geol- 

 oo"ists " took upon themselves to oppose by all means the acceptance of the Taconic sys- 

 tem. This united opposition very soon became personal, and notwithstanding the death 

 of some of their contemporaries. Dr. Emmons included, it has remained such, being 

 transferred to Mr. Marcou, as soon as Dr. Emmons disappeared from the field, at the 

 end of 1860. 



As a rule all the observations and publications of Emmons and Marcou have been os- 

 tracized and regarded as a priori false and unacceptable. On the contrary, all that is said 

 by the opposite party is received with consideration and even "with great pleasure." ^ 



'Previous to Emmons' researches and classifications, coveries of Vanuxem and Emmniis. For more details 



several essays, all more or less exclusively miueralogical, concerning Maclure's, Dewey's and Eaton's views, see my 



have referred the rocks of the Taconic region to what was paper, " American geological classification and nomen- 



then considered as the " geological nomenclature for North clature," which will soon be published. 



America." Maclure, Cleavelaud, Dewey, Eaton, E. Hitch- ^ See Quart. Joiirn. Geol. Soc. London, 1882, xxxviii, 



cock and a few others collected facts and specimeiis, and 408, in the " Discussion" at the end of Jlr. J. D. Dana's 



between 1809 and 1836 they published papers, geological paper, "On the geological age of the Taconic system." 



maps and sections, giving all their views as they under- Mr. J. D. Dana in a" Note on the age of the Green Moun- 



stood tlie question with their limited linowiedge and the tains" {Amer. Journ. Sc, 1880, 3d ser., xix, 191) says: 



very imperfect tools they had in their possession. '■ in conclusion, the rcestern half of the i-egion between the 



Vanuxem, however, is tlie first who referred the rocks of Connecticut River valley and the Hudson River, that is, the 



New York as Transition in his memoir, " On the classifica- western half of the Green Mountains area, is proved to con- 



tion and characters of American rock formation" {Amer. sist of rocks that are (1) of Lower Silurian age, etc." By 



Journ. Sc, 1829, xvi, 2.5+) ; and it is only from that discov- Lower Silurian he means the Champlain Division, 



ery of the exact and true age of tlie great formations of New From 1872 to 188G, Mr. J. D. Dana pul)lished a dozen 



York that anything worth recording as classification and papers on the " Geological age of the Taconic system"(See 



nomenclature can be quoted. Amcr. ,/onrn. Sc, 3d series, 1872-73, 1877, 1879-82, etc., 



Eaton's and Dewey's views are only mere expedients, and Quart. Journ. Oeol. Soc London, Aug., 1882); always 



showing their good will, even their enthusiasm, as collect- insisting that the Taconic schists, the quartzite and liine- 



ors of specimens and as teachers, but that is all ; and to try stone, are of the age of the Hudson River group, the 



at this late hour to claim for them any share in the classifl- Trenton limestone and Chazy, and denying the existence 



cation of the older paleozoic rocks is not justifiable and of the Taconic system. 

 merely serves to diminish the rightful credit due to the Uis- 



