‘OO NOVA SCOTIAN GEOLOGY—HONEYMAN, 
per, while at the time of the publication of “Acadian Geelogy,” 
1868, it had become objectionable by reason of the further deve- 
lopment of the series and Salter’s determinations of the severa 
members. My proper reasons were then given, when I had 
occasion to make a “ Middle Arisaig series.” Vide paper “on the 
‘I. C. R. in the Cobequids,” pp. 390, 392, Transactions of the In- 
stitute, 1873-4. 
I shall quote these: “After the lapse of ten years, and a great 
amount of labour and research, I consider that the alphabetical 
division is the only unobjectionable one that has been proposed, 
and that the only modification of the British division required 
is the omission of the ‘ Lower Ludlow, which was not suggested 
by Mr. Salter. Previous to Mr. Salter’s examination and corre- 
lation, I had correlated D with the Upper Ludlow of Wales. 
Dr. Dawson, at the same time, correlated C and D with the 
Lower Helderberg, U. S., and B' with the Clinton, U.S. D and 
‘C are further distinguished by Dr. Dawson ‘ Upper Arisaig, and 
B’ ‘ Lower Arisaig. Extensive observation has proved that Mr, 
Salter was correct in giving the Arisaig series a greater range in 
time than that given by Dr. Dawson. I have referred to another 
division of the Arisaig series into Upper and Lower, the Lower 
Helderberg equivalent being the Upper, and the Clinton the 
Lower Avrisaig. There are two applications of the word Arisaig. 
‘There is the Avisaig township and the locality Avisaig. In the 
former sense it is much too restricted, as it ignores a great part 
of the Arisaig series, besides a typical series of Crystalline rock, 
which I have elsewhere designated as ‘Lower Arisaig,—Trans- 
actions, 1872,—-and Carboniferous rocks. In the latter sense it 
includes too much, as the ‘Lower Arisaig’ of the division alone 
lies in Arisaig, while the ‘ Upper Arisaig’ is in the Moidart. 
“On these grounds I consider these divisions as untenable.” 
ACADIAN GEOLOGY. 
Maps. 
In my remarks upon the Maps of the two editions of Acadian 
Geology, I did not make sufticient allowance for necessary im- 
perfections, so that my remarks seem to be somewhat hypercriti- 
cal; still, it cannot be denied that on some very important 
