86 BULLETIN: MUSEUM OF COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY. 
Triassic times cannot now be stated ; the ten-foot layer of limestone dis- 
covered by Ells (95, p. 416) on the lava near Scot’s Bay is as yet an 
unsolved mystery. 
Now the present attitude of all these beds shows that they cannot lie 
in their original position. From Kingsport to Blomidon and thence 
many miles to the southwestward, the dip is toward the north and 
northwest, averaging about 15°. On the opposite side of Minas 
Basin, it is just as characteristically to the south, as shown in the 
traps, sandstones, and conglomerates. This arrangement of dips and 
the shape of the curve terminating in Cape Split suggest a synclinal 
structure for this portion of the Triassic area: an imperfect “ dishing” 
of the trap sheet after the manner of the Totoket and other ranges in 
Connecticut. That the same structure cannot be ascribed to the forma- 
tion farther southwest is clear from Dawson’s description of the occur- 
rence at Quaco Head in New Brunswick. The soft red sandstones 
and conglomerates aggregate 800 feet in thickness (Matthew) and dip 
NNE. at angles varying from 25° to 45° (Dawson, ’68, p. 108). Sim- 
ilarly the dip is north 50° near the contact with the old rocks of the 
Cobequid Mountains (Dawson, ’68, p. 100). Such a persistent dip of 
these shore-deposits toward the crystalline highlands doubtless indicates 
profound faulting. It is interesting to note that Bailey and Matthew 
(°72, p. 218) early described strike-faults in the Southern New Bruns- 
wick Trias with ‘“‘extensive downthrows on the south.” Excepting 
the suspected low synclinal in the east, the Triassic beds nowhere 
exhibit flexures on any but the most limited scale. They have, how- 
ever, been so disturbed as to show typical monoclinal structure. No 
important duplication of strata has yet been proved, but there are indi- 
cations that the general NW dip is due to block-faulting suggestively 
like that in the Connecticut Valley. In the long section of the “ sea- 
wall” at the head of St. Mary’s Bay, Bailey (’98, p. 124) describes 
many small faults with the upthrow constantly on the north. Bailey 
(98, pp- 126, 127; 98, p. 358 ; ’97, p. 114) further notes other faults 
at Digby and at Granville, and also states his general conclusion that the 
trough has been “faulted” in the direction of the axis of the bay. 
It is further possible that one or more faults may explain Bailey’s 
(98, p. 357; 798, p. 126) discovery of trap conglomerate lying ad- 
jacent to the lava ridge of North Mt., the conglomerate having been a 
contemporaneous deposit since faulted down to its present position. 
The constructional topography resulting from these movements must 
have been very different from that of the present time. The sandstones 
