Jttly 27, 1900.] 



SCIENCE. 



131 



in more advanced subjects be included in the under- 

 graduate curriculum ?' 



Peofbssoe F. Moeley : ' Certain phases of the 

 general question.' 



Peofkssoe J. W. A. Young : ' Collegiate prepara- 

 tion for the teaching of mathematics in eeoondary 

 schools. ' 



A general discussion of the subject then 

 took place. 



On each evening of the meeting, the mem- 

 bers generally took advantage of the op- 

 portunity to dine together. 



The next regular meeting of the Society 

 will be held in New York on Saturday, 

 October 27th. 



F. N. Cole, 

 Secretary. 



THE RELATION OF BIOLOGY TO PHYSI 

 OGBAPHT. 



The studies of paleontologists have been 

 among our chief sources of information con- 

 cerning the physiography of various regions 

 in past geologic periods. Far-reaching con- 

 clusions have been drawn from faunal re- 

 semblances and differences as to the relations 

 of sea and land, the presence or absence of 

 barriers and the direction of marine cur- 

 rents during particular epochs of the earth's 

 history. It is evident that biology should 

 bear a relation to physiography analogous 

 to that which paleontology bears to paleo- 

 physiography. Some of the ways in which 

 the two distinct sciences react upon each 

 other have been pointed out by Wood- 

 worth,* and it is the purpose of the writers 

 to call attention to a specific case in point 

 where identical conclusions were reached 

 quite independently by different investiga- 

 tors pursuing distinct lines of research. 



These results are of the utmost impor- 

 tance in the particular problems upon which 

 they bear, but their chief value at the 

 present time lies in the fact that they bring 

 physiography and biology upon common 



* J. B. Woodworth, ' The Eelation Between Base- 

 leveling and Organic Evolution,' Am. Geol., Vol. 

 XIV., pp. 209-235, 1894. 



ground and show that each may and should 

 receive assistance from the other. 



In discussing the origin and recent his- 

 tory of the physical features of the southern 

 Appalachians* in 1894 the writers advo- 

 cated the theory that the upper Tennessee 

 Eiver formerly flowed into the Gulf of Mex- 

 ico by way of the present Coosa and Ala- 

 bama rivers, and that it was diverted to its 

 present course through the Cumberland 

 Plateau in the latter part of Tertiary 

 I Neocene (?) \ time. The former course of 

 this river is shown on the accompanying 

 outline map by the dotted line A which ex- 

 tends in the direction of the upper Tennes- 

 see from the vicinity of Chattanooga south- 

 westward to the Coosa in eastern Alabama. 



This theory was again advocated by the 

 senior authorf in 1897-98, and the evidence 

 in its support was presented in somewhat 

 greater detail. The conclusions in both re- 

 ports were based entirely upon physio- 

 graphic evidence — such as the character of 

 the Tennessee — Coosa divide, the newness 

 of the gorge below Chattanooga and the 

 general arrangement of the drainage lines. 



We recently learned with considerable 

 surprise and gratification that Mr. Charles 

 T. Simpson, of the Smithsonian Institution, 

 had independently reached the same con- 

 clusion from a study of the fresh water 

 mollusca contained in the rivers in question . 



In an equally unexpected manner Mr. 

 Simpson has corroborated the conclusions 

 of the junior author J regarding the changes 

 which have taken place in the head 

 branches of the Coosa, Chattahoochee, and 

 Savannah rivers. 



The conclusion that the Etowah Eiver 

 had been robbed by the Chattahoochee 



* Geomorphology of the Southern Appalachians : 

 Nat. Geog. Mag., Vol. VI., pp. 63-126, May, 23, 1894. 



t Physiography of the Chattanooga District. 19th 

 Ann. Kept., U. S. Geol. Survey, Part II., pp. 1-58. 



t Drainage Modifications and their Interpretation. 

 Jour. Geol., Vol. 4, pp. 567-581 and 657-673. 



