LXXX ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



concerned. The term was, I believe, first proposed and u.>^ed by the late 

 Profe.-sor Dana, in his "Manual." to supersede the terms prinuiry, prim- 

 itive. ])rotozoic. azoic and eozoic. Its obvious advantage is, that, except 

 age, it indicates no theoiy or theoretical assumption. It is, therefore, the 

 best word yet coined to denote those cryptogeuous rock-masses which in 

 Canada constitute what are known as the Laurentian and Iluronian sys- 

 tems, or. as I should call them, the older and younger Arcluean. The 

 names Laurentian and Iluronian, tirst given by Logan and Hunt, have 

 now been ado])ted in many other countries ; but in none of these are the 

 recognized Arcluean rocks exposed to obsei'vation as continuousl}^ and 

 over as enormous areas as thej' are in Canada. For these reasons alone, 

 the names are appropriate,, and should be retained. As the evidence 

 now stands, no new names are needed to designate this great and closely 

 united Archa'an system. 



The name Algonkian should be rejected ; it has been invented and 

 adopted in the United States on an entire misconception, misrepresent- 

 ation and want of knowledge of Ilui'ouian, due in part, it nivist be con- 

 fessed, to contradictory statements that have occurred in the publications 

 of our own Geological Survey. These, however, cannot alter facts. And 

 a revision of statements is now alone required to make the Canadian 

 Arcluean system consistent and intelligible. But above all we must 

 reject the — as 1 have elsewhere pointed out — entirely erroneous, but oft- 

 re|)ca(ed, statement of nonconformity between the Laurentian and 

 Iluronian. Wherever their history is complete, and the record has not 

 been destroj-ed, dislocated, or otherwise concealed, the lower and upper 

 Archa'an rocks ])ass into, and more or less mingle with, each other, and 

 the then .slowl}- changing conditions of evolution, to which I shall again 

 refer, are clearly demonstrated. 



Many subdivisions may, and doubtless will, be worked out in the 

 future; but these are matters of stratigraphical detail, and will not aftcct 

 the hroader conclusions. 



Two such subdivisions have already been recorded by Lawson, late 

 of the Geological Survey of Canada, — the Coutchiching and the Keewatin, 

 in the districts of the Lake of the Woods and Eain}^ Lake. 



To base broad and regional conclusions, however, on observations over 

 such limited districts is neither safe nor jjhilosophical ; and especially is 

 this so when dealing with Archa'an rocks in which dips, depths, strikes 

 and thicknesses are always more or less problematical and uncertain. 



Theory doul)tlcss has its advantages. Itut it has also one very serious 

 disadvantage, viz., that its author is very a])t to seek and to record the 

 facts which seem to support his theory, while he overlooks, or gives but 

 little i)rominence to others, equally marked and important, but that have 

 an 0])posite tendency. This, together with ])ersonal and jiarty consider- 

 ations, has been in the past, and will [)robably continue in the future to 

 be, a serious hindi-ancc to tiie progress of geological knowledge and truth 



