300 PETRIFIED FORESTS OF ARIZONA. 



beds of coarse sandstone that hold them, therefore, that the evidence 

 need be sought. This I did with the utmost care, but even here 1 

 found no example of an upright trunk. 



In this, as I was glad to learn after my return on looking the mat- 

 ter up, I was only confirming the observations of Dr. J. S. Newberry, 

 made in 1858 and published in 1861.^ 



Although it is easy to find petrified limbs and small twigs among 

 the other objects, still these occur sporadically and accidentally at any 

 and all points. They are no more likely to be found beyond the ter- 

 mination of the tall trunks than anywhere else, as would be the case 

 if the trees lay near where they grew. In fact, it happened that I 

 never found small twigs in this position, although I searched in hun- 

 dreds of cases. 1 found no petrified cones, but 1 heard vague reports 

 of their having been found. It would be strange if none were pre- 

 served in such a vast mass of trunks of cone-bearing trees. 



Finally the great abundance of the material would seem to negative 

 the idea that it could have all grown on the same area. Even if every 

 tree had been preserved, there are places where it would have been 

 impossible for them to stand as thickly as they lie on the surface, not 

 to speak of the space that trees in a forest require in order to thrive, 

 as these trees evidently did thrive. And while there is now no place 

 where they lie so thickly in the original bed of sandstone, still, even 

 here they are not only all prostrate, but lie in little collections and 

 huddles quite differently from what should be expected if they were 

 precisely where they grew. 



The preservation of a forest in situ with the trunks erect could 

 scarcely take place except by some sudden, commonh'^ eruptive agency. 

 Such agencies have undoubtedly operated in the preservation cf the pet- 

 rified forests of the Yellowstone Park and of others that I have visited 

 in Wyoming and elsewhere, in which the stumps and sometimes tall 

 trunks do stand in position with their roots in the ground, but in the 

 region under consideration there are only faint indications of eruptive 

 agencies, certainly not sufficient to account for the phenomena. 



The indications therefore all point to some degree of transportation 

 of this material by water antecedent to petrifaction, and the great 



1 Report upon the Colorado River of the West, explored In 1857 and 1858, by Lieut. Joseph C. Ives. 

 Washington, 1861, 4°. Part III. Geological Report, by J. S. Newberry, p. 80. 



Dr. Newberry's statement is as follows; 



"I examined these specimens with some care to determine, if possible, whether they had grown ou 

 the spot, as those of Lithodendron Creek are supposed to have done by the members of Captain Whip- 

 ple's party, or whether they had been transported to their positions. In all that came under my 

 observation, 1 failed to find any evidence that they had grown in the vicinity. Al! the trunks are 

 stripped of their branches and e.xhibit precisely the appearance of those transported to some distance 

 by the agency of water. In confirmation of this view 1 should also say 1 found in the marls, with the 

 entire trunks, rounded and water-worn fragments of wood, in some instances silicihed and in others 

 converted into lignite. 



I gathered the same impression from all the collections of silicified wood which 1 observed in this 

 formation in western New Mexico, viz: that all had been transportcd.hut noi fur removed from their 

 place of growth." 



