NEW BRUNSWICK. 367 



observing this extraordinary rearrangement of the rocks in Southern 

 New Brunswick, throwing them from 8,000 to 15,000 feet perpendicu- 

 lar, that it has been stated all along that the Azoic and Silurian ages 

 ■were ages of stability and repose, excepting some volcanic action, and 

 that the formations were confcn-mable to one another, with the possible 

 exception of a slight unconformability between the Portland and Cold- 

 brook gi-oups. It would seem, then, that lithological resemblances — 

 especially if accompanied by the dictum of Dr. Hunt — were regarded 

 as being more important than stratigraphical facts. There does not 

 appear to bo any evidence of faults or overturns ; but these were im- 

 agined in order to explain the resemblance in lithological characters, and 

 carry out the views of the Canadian geologists. The language of Messrs. 

 Bailey and Matthew admits of no otber possible construction. 



The natural explanation of the lithological resemblances seems to us 

 to be, that similar eruptive materials were originated in different ages. 

 Such fiiults and overturns should by no means have been introduced, 

 unless some evidence could be brought forward of their actual exist- 

 ence. 



In the Report of Progress for 187G-77, Mr. Matthew regards the 

 Coastal group as Laurentian, and the Kingston group as partly Upper 

 and partly Lower Silurian. At one place this group is said to uncon- 

 formably overlie the St. John group, and to contain pebbles probably 

 derived from it. {I. c, pp. 334-350.) 



In the Report of Progress for 1876-78, the Kingston series is regarded 

 by the same gentleman as Upper Silurian on account of palreontologi- 

 cal evidence, although lithologically it appears to be Huronian, and to 

 dip beneath that group. {I. c, p. 6 E.) 



In Prof. Bailey's report, in the same volume, the Coldbrook and 

 Coastal groups remain in the Huronian, and the Upper Coldbrook 

 series is taken away from the St. John group, and replaced in the Hu- 

 ronian below the Coastal, on account of the unconformability of certain 

 rocks supposed to belong to the series. {I. c, pp. 28, 29 DD.) 



Tlie Huronian is conformably interl)anded with the Devonian rocks 

 at Bloomsbury Mountain and westward from Black River ; but that this 

 does not prove that they belong to the same series is said to be shown 

 by the conglomerates of the Devonian being largely made up of debris 

 from the Huronian, and by the absence of conformability in some places. 

 It would seem that in much of the district in question Prof. Bailey has 

 no other than lithological evidence to prove that he is dealing with 

 Devonian strata. {I. c, pp. 21-23 DD.) The statement that the De- 



