10 



when all the materials were in a soft and plastic condition, 

 must have pressed down on the coal in such a way as to re- 

 duce its thickness and give it this laminated structure. 

 Borings made in the vicinity of Bridgeport and Massillon 

 have failed to find any lower seam, and it is scarcely possible 

 that there should be another below that mined. The sec- 

 tion at Bridgeport is precisely what it should be, if the 

 Bridgeport coal were Coal No. 1. The elements which com- 

 pose it are as follows: 



1. Sandrock 6o feet. 4. Gray Shale 4(i feet. 



2. Coal 1 foot. .",. Coal No. 2 2' 6". 



3. Fireclay 2 feet. 6. Fireclay 3 feet. 



7. Sandy Shale, to l)ottoin of canal o feet. 



Again Dr. N. writes: — A thin coal seam is also some- 

 times found below the Massillon sandstone. It ma}- be seen 

 at several of the quarries in the neighborhood of Massillon. 

 At Warthorst and Go's, quarry the junction of the shale and 

 the sandstone is well seen, and for a limited distance a thin 

 coal seam is interposed between them. In the cliff above 

 Bridgeport mine, the thin coal referred to above is exposed 

 lying between the shale and the Massillon .sandstone, and is 

 generally met with from one to two feet in thickness in the 

 borings made west of the river." 



Dr. Newberr\''s conclusion evidently is that the Bridge- 

 port coal is identical with No. 1. The decision was perhaps 

 excusable if no evidence had been attainable beyond what 

 was afforded by the Bridgeport mine and its surroundings on 

 the east side of the Tuscarawas River. But even then there 

 was strong ground for suspicion, which so keen and practiced 

 an observer might have been expected to entertain or at least 

 to record. 



The thinness of the seam is explicable, but the inferior 

 quality of the coal so close to mines where No. 1 was found 

 at its best, and above all the strong yellow stain so con- 

 spicuous on all the faces, giving the whole mass a distinctl)- 

 rusty color, were enough to raise considerable doubt regard- 

 ing its identity wdth No. 1. 



