THE ANTHRACOLITHIC OR UPPER PALEOZOIC ROCKS 

 OF KANSAS AND RELATED REGIONS 



CHARLES S. PROSSER 

 Columbus, Ohio 



A recent monograph by Dr. George H. Girty^ contains certain 

 statements which are so misleading that I desire to briefly call atten- 

 tion to them. In the main they refer to some remarks of mine^ 

 concerning earlier conclusions published by Dr. Girty relating to the 

 age of the Guadalupian and its correlation with the Upper Paleozoic 

 formations of Kansas, 



Dr. Girty has attributed a threefold argument to me-* which he 

 then proceeds to take up in detail. ^ 



In regard to the age of the Guadalupian which is his first point, 

 I quoted exactly the words used by Dr. Girty in his two papers and 

 gave them in the order in which they were published.^ In no way did 

 I attempt to obscure his meaning or mislead the reader concerning 

 it. I did note that he had changed quite decidedly from his first opin- 

 ion concerning the age; but I made no comment and in no way 

 attempted to criticize his opinions. His statement in this last work 

 that I am correlating the Guadalupian with the Upper Permian is 

 erroneous, for I have never expressed any opinion concerning the 

 age of the Guadalupian. 



In the second place I compared the lists of fossils from the Hueco 

 and Kansas formations published at that time by Dr. Girty, as I 



iThe Anthracolithic is a term proposed by Waagen for the united Carboniferous 

 and Permian systems {Palaeontologia Indica, Ser. XTII, Vol. IV, " Geological Results," 

 p. 241). It is here used when speaking of the Carboniferous and Permian systems 

 taken together or as an equivalent of the somewhat indefinite term of Upper Paleozoic. 



2 "The Guadalupian Fauna," United States Geological Survey, Professional 

 Paper 58, 1908 [1909]. 



3 Am. Geol., Vol. XXXVI, 1905, pp. 156-58. 



4 "The Guadalupian Fauna," op. cit., p. 40. 



5 Ibid., pp. 40-42. 



6 See pp. 156 and 157 of my paper. 



125 



