4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL, MUSEUM vol. 76 



creating some doubt as to the exact contemporaneity of these deposits 

 laid down in two areas separated by only 6 miles. This discrepancy 

 may, however, also be explained by a geographic arrangement where- 

 by the one area was enabled to get more constant restocking from 

 the common parent sea. No question, however, remains concerning 

 the relative position of these beds in their respective sections. The 

 Burgess shale definitely underlies the massive, usually unfossilifer- 

 ous Eldon limestone, which closes the Middle Cambrian sequence at 

 many places in the Canadian Eockies. Fossils have been reported in 

 the Eldon from localities chiefly to the east and north of Field, and 

 until these and the fossils of underlying formations are studied 

 nothing further can be said concerning the age of the Burgess shale. 

 However, with the information now in hand the statement that its 

 position is above the middle of the Middle Cambrian seems unde- 

 niable. 



At present it is not possible to say exactly what position the soft 

 yellow shales from central Manchuria hold. From the scanty in- 

 formation in hand it would appear that these shales are either inter- 

 bedded with or directly overlie the oolitic limestones containing 

 Dorypyge richtJiofeni. In either case this bed is succeeded by a non- 

 oolitic limestone containing the Asiatic Drepanura fauna, which ap- 

 j)arently belongs to the Middle Cambrian and may therefor have 

 been deposited at the same time as the Eldon, while the underlying 

 oolitic and shaly beds, with a Dorypyge fauna, are to be correlated 

 with the upper part of the Stephen. At any rate, considering the 

 Manchurian section as now known, as being fairly representative of 

 Middle Cambrian time, this yellow shale would hold a position some- 

 what above the middle of that division, and hence be in the same 

 relative position as the Stephen formation. Additional data have 

 recently been secured which we hope will throw more light on the 

 problem and possibly clear up some of the uncertainties. 



The Cranbrook locality has yielded a most interesting Lower Cam- 

 brian fauna that contains some new elements, particularly a new 

 Mesonacid genus, but which in general agrees with what we ordi- 

 narily expect in a Lower Cambrian Mesonacid fauna. This same 

 fauna has been collected from red and gray limestones and from 

 sandstones in the vicinity of the Upper Columbia Lake and seems 

 to continue northward into the Dogtooth Mountains, as the equiva- 

 lent of the lower Mount Whyte fauna, with the possibility that it is 

 also the same as the Hota ^ fauna at Mount Robson. At Cranbrook 

 the relatively soft Tuzoia beds, composing the Eager formation,^ 

 outcrop but poorly and consequently their relative position is not 



1 Walcott, 1913, Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 57, no. 12, p. 338. Wtien this fauna was 

 described the formation was erroneously given as Mahto. 



2 Schofleld, S. J, 1922, Canadian Geol. Surv., Bull. 35, p. 12. 



