TABLE Ol^' CONTENTS. 



V 



rocks into six groups, and refers to Devonian, Stlurian, Laureutian, and ITu- 

 ronian, 360-362. Bailkv, Mattiikw, and Haiitt, in 1805, give their views 

 of tlie age of the roclcs of SoaUieru Now Brunswick, 362, 363. Bailey and 

 Matthew again, in the Report for 1870-71, express tlieir opinions of the 

 sequence of these roclis, 364 ; numerous clianges made, to conform witli the 

 views of Hunt based on lithological considerations, 364 ; confusion thus intro- 

 duced, 364-366 ; faults and overturns imagined in order to sustain these new 

 views, 367 ; an easy explanation of the dillieulties, 367. Further confusion and 

 sliifting of the various groups fronx place to place by Mattilew and Bailey, in 

 the Reports for 1876-77 and 1876-78. Ells, in the Report for 1876-78, 

 describes rocks as Laurentian and Devonian, which in 1865 were called Devo- 

 nian, and in 1871 Ilurouian. Further changes, and the St. John group placed 

 in the Cambrian, in the Report of 1878-79, by Matthew, Bailey, and Ells, 

 368. Bailey's view of New Brunswick geology, in 1880, 368, 369. Hunt, in 

 1878, pr(isents his views of New Brunswick geology, mingling his own ideas witli 

 those of Bailey and Matthew, and disregarding the se<picnce of time in which 

 these were presented, 371 ; resulting confusion, 371 ; impossihility of har- 

 monizing Hunt's views, as expressed in 1870, Avith his subsiMj^uent explanation 

 of them, 372 ; a tabular statement of Hunt's views as expressed by him in 1870, 

 and as that expression was explained by him afterwards, 372 ; remarks on the 

 value of the work thus done, 372. Matthew and Bailey misrepresented by 

 Hunt in 1879, 373. The rocks of Southern Kew Brunswick declared by Hunt, 

 in 1875, to be Huronian and Montalban, 373. Various views of the New 

 Brunswick geologists, so far as the same can be deciphered, presented in tahular 

 form, 374. 



N"OVA SCOTIA. 



Hind, in 1870, indicates the presence of Huronian and Laurentian in Nova Scotia, 

 374, 375 ; J. W. Dawson regards the Laurentian gneiss of Hind as being 

 intrusive granite, 375 ; Selwyn differs from Dawson, 375 ; Selwyn's views 

 ciiticised, 375 ; Hunt considers the Iluroiiiau of Hind to be Montalban, 376 ; 

 Honeyman's views, which seem to be valueless, and are objected to by J. W. 

 Dawson, 376 ; Hartley's opinions of rocks of Cape Breton, and some sugges- 

 tions in regard to them, 376 ; Robb's examination of the same region, in the 

 Reports for 1873-74 and 1874-75, 376; Selwyn's commentaries on Robh's 

 work, 377; great change in Sklavyn's views since 1871, 377. Further stnte- 

 ments by J. W. Dawson, in 1878, 377. The condition of the question summed 

 up, 378. 



NEWFOUNDLAND. 



Reconnaissance by Juices, in 1839-40, 378. Murray, in the Report for 1864, 

 recognizes the Laurentian, and gives a table of the formation occurring in New- 

 foundland, 379. Hi the Report for 1868, Muuray introduces an Intermediate 

 system, supposed to be the e(piivalcnt of the Cambrian and Huronian, 379 ; 

 supposed fossils in this series, 379 ; these I'ejected by the palceontologist of the 

 Survey, 379 ; further discoveries of supposed fossils in these rocks, 380 ; Mur- 

 ray, in the Report for 1873, presents reasons for dividnig the Laurentian into 

 . two groups, 330 ; the real state of the case, 380, 



