540 A. C. PEALE 
Study by Hatcher of the vertebrate collections made by him 
in 1882 and 1883 from the Judith River beds led him to the conclu- 
sion that this vertebrate fauna was older than Laramie fauna of the 
uppermost Cretaceous. By Laramie as used by Hatcher, it must 
be remembered, is meant the Ceratops beds, now called the Lance 
formation, which in the writer’s opinion has been conclusively 
shown by Knowlton’ to be of Lower Fort Union (Eocene) age. 
Hatcher was confirmed in his views by finding marine Cretaceous 
shales apparently overlying the Judith River beds. It must be 
again recalled in this connection that this was an area of complica- 
ted folding and great disturbances, the result mainly of numerous 
faults recognized by all who have been in the region from the time 
of Hayden’s first explorations to those of Hatcher and Stanton. 
The latter says:? 
“No better description of the frequency of these disturbances and the 
difficulties they have caused the stratigrapher can be given than that of Dr. 
Hayden,” whom he quotes. The latter part of this quotation is as follows: 
“‘So much are the beds disturbed by forces acting from beneath that it seems 
almost hopeless to obtain a section showing with perfect accuracy the order ~ 
of superposition of the different strata.” 
In 1896 Hatcher made the statement that the Judith River 
beds were certainly older than the Ceratops beds of Converse 
County, Wyo., and that ‘‘the dinosaurs from the Judith River 
country belonged to smaller and less specialized forms than those 
from the latter locality,” and refers in the same article to his belief 
that ‘“‘the Judith River beds are the equivalent of the 4oo feet of 
barren sandstones, thus lying between the base of the Ceratops 
beds and the marine Fox Hills sandstones in Converse County, 
Wyo.” Later, he repeats? this statement and adds: “‘I am at 
present of the opinion that they pertain to a still lower horizon.” 
In the early part of 1903 Hatcher says he “‘believes the exact 
stratigraphical position of the Judith River beds remains unsettled 
and that it is premature to assert that the true Judith River beds 
«Knowlton, Proc. Wash. Acad. Sci., XI (1909), No. 3, pp. 179-238; and Jour. 
Geol., XIX (May-June, 1911), 358-76. 
2 Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv. No. 257, 1905, Pp. 34. 
3 Science, N.S., XVI (November 21, 1902), 832. 
