74 REVIEWS 



species shown by this table should be applicable to a considerable area. Its appli- 

 cability should, indeed, be limited only by facts of identity of horizon and of basinal 

 boundary. 



The tabulation of the species according to their occurrence in the minor 

 formations, some fifty of which are recognized in the 2,000 feet of strata, is 

 essentially a repetition, though perfectly independent, of a similar attempt 

 made a decade ago. It is mainly valuable in substantiating the conclu- 

 sions arrived at at that time regarding the serial grouping of the various 

 lithologic units of the region. 



Mr. White's record of the fossil plants, while necessarily meager, is 

 important as the most complete list of species yet published. It affords 

 many suggestive considerations. The author states that — 

 nearly all the specimens here discussed are of Coal Measures (Pennsylvanian) age. 

 But very Uttle plant material from beds of the supposed Permian of Kansas has yet 

 been described. The University of Kansas, in connection with its geological survey 

 of the state, has accumulated more or less fossil plant material in its paleonto- 

 logical collections. This paleobotanical material, which has been sought with 

 especial regard to the Permian problem, is now being studied by Mr. E. H. Sel- 

 lards, and will probably receive systematic treatment and illustration in one of the 

 proposed volumes of the state university survey. The writer is under obligation 

 to Mr. Sellards and to the university for specimens, particularly of Permian types, 

 submitted for examination or donated to the collections of the United States Nation- 

 al Museum. This material, so far as it has anywhere yet been published, is included 

 in this simimary; but such species in the material communicated by Mr. Sellards 

 as are new to science or have not previously been discovered in the state obviously 

 could not be included without unfairly anticipating their full description by him 

 and impairing the originahty of his pubHcation. Accordingly, in dealing with the 

 supposed Permian flora in particular, which he has been so successful in discover- 

 ing, all paleontological discussion of the material is here omitted. 



The plant remains throw no light on the possible subdivisions of the 

 section; and the whole Lower and Upper Coal Measures are merely said 

 to represent the Allegheny section of Pennsylvania. 



Professor Prosser's article on the Permian, while adding nothing new to 

 the subject, is important as affording a connected review of all that has 

 been written on the Kansas Permian beds during the past few years. 

 A considerable portion of the paper is taken up in defending former 

 positions this author has taken. Concerning the retention of certain 

 names the author mentioned, without bringing out any additional reasons, 

 quotes a final rule of the Federal Survey. Without questioning the good 

 taste of such proceeding, or the fact that it adds no weight whatever to a 

 logical conclusion, it is not probable that any organization on the face of 



