158 CHARLES S. PROSSER 



These deposits are characterized (aside from the species particularly peculiar 

 to them) by Carboniferous and also by Permian species. 



Since these deposits lie directly over the Fusulina limestone of the Urals 

 (which must be looked on as equivalent to the very uppermost formations of 

 the Carboniferous), we may not refer the deposits in question to the Carbon- 

 iferous system. 



On the other hand, I do not find it wholly easy to refer these deposits (and 

 the Lower and Middle Productus limestone of India corresponding to them) 

 to the Permian formation, as I earlier thought possible; for the Permian system, 

 in the sense used by Murchison, itself must begin only with the formations which 

 lie over the Kungur strata — more exactly, only with the limestones of the Province 

 of Kostroma, which contain an older fauna than does the Zechstein of western 

 Europe. 



It is interesting to note that v^hat Dr. Tschernyschev^ said of the 

 outcrops of Artinsk and Upper Carboniferous near the city of Oufa 

 in eastern Russia is certainly paleontologically suggestive of the 

 Kansan deposits. He wrote as follows: 



Les bords pittoresques du lac de I'usine de Simsk offrent une coupe classique 

 pour I'etudedes depots d' Artinsk etdes sediments carboniferessousjacents 



Les calcaires qui altement avec les gres consistent par places presque en 

 entier en grosses fusulines {Fusulina Verneuili Moell.). Pres de la meme digue 

 on voit apparaitre de dessous les gres d'Artinsk et en concordance avec lui le 

 gres carbonifere qui contient, avec coquilles de Fusulina Verneuili Moell., Pro- 

 ductus semireticulatus Mart., Productus longispinus Sow., Martinia glabra Mart., 

 des restes de Dielasma et de Spirifer (du type de Spirifer mosquensis Fisch.).' 



The argument has been advanced that because Carboniferous 

 brachiopods occur in the Kansas deposits, which I have referred to 

 the Permian, they could not belong in the Permian system. Professor 

 Diener has studied exhaustively the faunas of the Salt Range Pro- 

 ductus limestone of India and the Alpine Permian and in a recent 

 letter he refers to the results of this study. If his conclusions are 

 correct it wih be seen that the occurrence of Carboniferous brachio- 

 pods in deposits superjacent to those which contain Foraminifera 

 characteristic of the uppermost Carboniferous of Russia, as is the 

 case in Kansas, is no argument at all against the Permian age of 

 these Kansan deposits. Professor Diener calls attention to the dis- 



I Guide des Excursions du VII Cojigres Geologique International, III (A partir 

 de la ville d'Oufa jusqu'au versant oriental de I'Oural), 1897, pp. 21, 23. 



