THE LARAMIE FORMATION AND THE SHOSHONE GROUP 29 



large formation or a group not completely represented at any one 

 locality. Such was and is the case with the "Laramie Group." 



As to the origin of the term Laramie Mr. Veatch points out that 

 Clarence King, who proposed the name and defined its application, 

 was very careful in the choice of appropriate geographic names for 

 formations. That is undoubtedly true in a general way, still, King 

 was not working under any rule such as that now prevailing in the 

 U. S. Geological Survey. Much space is given by Mr. Veatch to 

 establishing by citations the exact application of the name Laramie 

 Plains in the seventies, and to showing that the sections of " Laramie" 

 beds examined by the Hayden and King survey geologists were 

 probably all above the unconformity seen at Carbon. His conclu- 

 sion is that *' the type locality of the Laramie is Carbon, on the Lara- 

 mie Plains."* If the term Laramie had been in fact proposed 

 especially for strata of the Laramie Plains, or even for a formation 

 known by King and Hayden only in the zone traversed by the Union 

 Pacific Railroad or the Fortieth Parallel in Wyoming, it is probable 

 that many stratigraphers would agree with Mr. Veatch in his sweep- 

 ing conclusion that: "strictly considered, the term Laramie, there- 

 fore, can appropriately be applied only to the beds above the great 

 unconformity," whatever they might think of the new restriction "and 

 below the Fort Union. "^ But the name was not so proposed. It 

 was introduced into literature and defined by King as a compromise 

 term for beds known to be widely distributed from Montana to New 

 Mexico. The statement made by King is very clear as to the desire 

 of Hayden and himself to have a name which each could use for a 

 great series of supposedly conformable beds, without prejudice as 

 to age. Laramie was practically proposed as a synonym for "Lig- 

 nitic, " but not as an exact one, for that term had been very broadly 

 used by Hayden and others. Mr. Veatch thinks that "if merely a 

 general term without a type locality had been desired, the term 

 Lignitic, exactly defined for the area involved, would have served 

 all purposes.® That is possibly true, if King and Hayden had 

 thought so, and been willing to use it, but they wisely adopted 

 another course. 



There is not the slightest doubt as to the fundamental stratigraphic 



* Amer. Jour. Sci., 4th ser., Vol. XXIV, 1907, p. 20. 

 » Ibid. « Ibid. 



