T\'iiicliell.] . i^ [March 5, 



of the Grand Traverse Eegion in the lower peninsula of jVJichigan, among 

 which I alluded to the ratification of my previous opinions that tlie Black 

 Shale of the West is the equivalent of the Genesee Shale. I announced 

 here, for the first time that this shale had afforded me two characteristic 

 New York fossils from near the mouth of Bear Creek in Canada West — 

 Leiorhynehus muUicosta and Discina Lodensis.^^ 



In this report I repeated my correction that the ' ' green shales ' ' above 

 the Genesee Shale in Michigan corresj)ond to some portion — perliaj)S the 

 Cashaqua Shale— of the Portage group of New York, while the higher 

 bluish, ai'gillaceous shales might answer to the Chemung. 



In June of the same year, having occasion to make a survey and report, ^ ' 

 in conjunction with Dr. Newberry, upon portions of Knox and Coshocton 

 counties in Ohio, I cited several Waverly sandstone species as extending 

 upward into the Coal Measures, and suggested that the Ohio equivalent 

 of the Portage and the Chemung might be the series of the "Chocola'te 

 Shales and Flags, ' ' whose existence beneath the fossiliferous sandstones 

 of Ohio had been demonstrated by borings. The deepest of these borings 

 indicated the existence of 1060 feet of shales and sandstones between the 

 base of the False Coal Measures and the top of the Genesee Shale. Of this 

 distance 534 feet were occupied by the so-called "chocolate shales and 

 flags." 



In July of the same year Messrs. Meek and Worthen^^ described two 

 additional species, of which one was from Richfield, Summit county, Ohio, 

 and the other from Rockford, Indiana. 



During the same year (1866) appeared the first volume of the final Re- 

 port on the geology of Illinois, in which Mr. Worthen,s5 speaking of the 

 Kinderhook group, locates it at the base of the Carboniferous system, insists 

 upon the carboniferous affinities of its fauna, and expresses the opinion 

 that no rocks exist in Illinois or Indiana which can be referred to the 

 Chemimg group of New York. 



Before the close of the year the second volume of this Report appeared, 

 in which the paleontology of the Kinderhook group is described by Messrs. 

 Meek, Worthen, and Newberry,*'^ the facts of which seemed fully to sus- 

 tain the previous opinions of those geologists in reference to the age of 

 the group. 



During the same year (1866) Professor HalF^ also made advance publica- 

 tion of some views which were to be embodied in ]|*is fourth volume of the ' 

 Paleontology of New York. In this paper he insisted with great earnest- 

 ness upon the probable Chemung age of the Waverly series and its west- 

 ern equivalents, explaining the contrast of the eastern and western faunas 

 on geographical and hydrograj)hical considerations. 



S3 Mr. .T. P. Lesley has somewtiere attributed the discovery of these fossils to Professor Hall. It 

 is true that I had exhibited them to Professor Hall and obtained his acciwiescence in my identifica- 

 tion, but he did not intimate that he previously observed them west of New York, Indeed, in his 

 latest known opinion these Canadian shales had been referred to the Portage group. (Geology of 

 Canada, 1863, p. 3S7. 



s-i Prospectus of the Neff Petroleum Co., p. 7. '' Proc. Acad. Nat. Soi. Phil., July, 1866, p. 2.'51. 



so Ueol. Survey 111., I, p. 108. ''7 Geol. Surv. 111. II, Paleont. pp. 62, 77, 80, 145. 



*" Trans. Amer. Philosophical Soc-, 1806, p- 240 ; in advance of Vol. IV, Paleont. of N. Y. 



