12 BULLETIN: MUSEUM OF COMPAEATIYE ZOOLOGY. 



whole to the Miocene. They emphasized this conclusion hy speaking^ 

 of Barrett's " determination of the ^Miocene age of the coralliferous sands 

 and shales at the base of the great inclined limestone." We can find in 

 literature no substantiation of this alleged assertion of Barrett, and it is 

 not in harmony with his sections as given by Woodward and Jones. 

 These writers were no doubt misled by the superficial resemblance of the 

 upper beds of the Blue Mountain Series to the Bowden conglomerates 

 into considering them identical. 



P/anfcf/n Garc/en Rwe 



/- 



Figure 3. Duncan nnd "Wall's Section of the Jamaican Sequence. 1. White 

 Limestone. 2. Miocene Claris and Sands. 7. Altered Conglomerates and 

 Cretaceous Rocks Mixed with Dikes. 



In the same paper Duncan and Wall, by the figured section ^ repro- 

 duced herewith, completely obliterated all conception of the true position 

 of tlie Bowd'ni formation by erroneously making it stratigraphically con- 

 tinuous with the Cambridge Yellow limestone beds. In 1896 we person- 

 ally restudied the section between Bath and Bowden, and found that the 

 relations of the beds liad been wrongly given by these writers, and that 

 tlie Bowden beds, instead of being continuous with the Cambridge beds, 

 were separated from them by all the lower White limestones as shown 

 in the following section. 



P/anta/n Gorc^en/^ioer 



3 I 2 7 



Figure 4. Correction of Duncan and "WalTs Section of the Jamaican Sequence. 



Tlieso errors, as published in the Englisli serial literature between the 

 dates of tlie ofllcial fudd work and the publication of the final report, 

 were perpetuated by I'.theridge in tlie Appendix of tlie hitter work. On 

 page -03, otir CambridL'^o beds — wliicli are so well described in the 

 individual reports upon the wcstorn parishes under the heads of "Yellow 

 Limestone" nnd "Calcareous Claris" — are correlated by him with the 

 Bowden beds, and discussed with them (and perhaps other formations) 



» Quart. Jour. Geol. See. London. 1865. Vol XXT p 2. « Ibid., p. d 



