Aucaust 20, 1897. ] 
In this connection I would call attention to a 
striking feature of the Grand Canyon faults, as 
described by Dutton in his monograph. He 
says the ends of the down-thrown strata are 
commonly turned down in this region, the beds 
on the other side coming undisturbed to the 
fault. This is specifically described for the 
West Kaibab and Hurricane faults, both with 
up-throw to east. 
The phenomenon of the down-turned edges is 
puzzling, but it might result from the following 
history. All the steps assumed to follow in suc- 
cession are found in the region to-day: 
1. Western beds flexed up, giving a western 
high level passing through a monocline to an 
eastern low level. 
2. Flexure becomes a fault at the foot (east 
end) of the monocline, giving western high level 
passing down a monocline to an east-facing 
fault cliff, below which lie the horizontal beds 
of the undisturbed side. 
8. Reversal of fault, giving upthrow on east 
and the structure existing to-day—low level on 
west passing to a west-facing fault cliff by a 
down-turn (monocline perhaps partly obliter- 
ated by friction during the reversal). 
In confirmation is the fact that both faults 
are greatest in the north and steadily diminish 
southward, the Hurricane having at the river 
less than a sixth of its northern value, while 
the West Kaibab disappears just where it crosses 
the chasm. Dutton thinks it reappears to the 
south of the canyon, but reversed, giving an 
east-facing cliff. So if the observation of Dut- 
ton is good, reversal of fault has occurred in 
one case and there is a suggestion of it in the 
other. Now the significance of this fault his- 
tory is that the river seems conscious of some- 
thing of the sort. It turns south on the second 
V of the Grand Canyon at the Hurricane fault, 
as if to avoid the early western uplift, now re- 
corded only in the down-turned strata-ends; 
while at the Kaibal the reversal-point has been 
selected by the river to return northward from 
the deviation about the uplift here. The pecu- 
liar grouping of meanders is readily seen on the 
map, as also the relation of bends in the river 
to the displacements at the Uinta, junction of 
Grand and Green, Kaibab (Hast and West), and 
Hurricane. ~ ; 
SCIENCE. 
295 
In explaining these latter events as repre- 
sented in effect on the present river, I have 
founded my suggestion on that simple and 
diagrammatic character that Powell and Dutton 
have described in this region. 
Are not these additional grounds for ques- 
tioning the Colorado’s antecedence ? 
Mark S. W. JEFFERSON. 
GILMANTON, N. H. 
AMPHIBIA OR BATRACHIA. 
To THE EDITOR OF SCIENCE: As a teacher 
of zoology, but without claim to expert authority 
upon taxonomic points, I read the article of Dr. 
Baur under the above title (ScIENCE, July 30, 
1897, 170-174), with the hope and expectation 
of being able to decide which name to employ 
hereafter. I regret to confess myself still un- 
convinced. Dr. Baur shows that the French 
word Batraciens was applied to the frogs, toads 
and salamanders by Brogniart in 1799, and that 
the Latin forms Batrachiit and Batrachia were 
not introduced until 1804 and 1807, by Latreille 
and Gravenhorst respectively. But does not 
Dr. Baur lay undue stress upon the distinction 
between the French and the Latin form. 
Batraciens is not (like crapaud, etc.) a vernacu- 
lar word; itis the French form, or Galloparonym, 
of the Latin Batrachia, and the employment of 
the former would seem to constructively sanc- 
tion the use of the latter. In anatomy the 
employment of either of the national forms, 
hippocamp, Hippokamp, hippocampe, or hip- 
pocampo, would be tantamount to the intro- 
duction of the international form, hippocam- 
pus. The principle involved in both cases 
has been formulated by me in two passages in 
my ‘ Neural Terms, International and National 
(Jour. Comp. Neurology, V1., 274, 329), as fol- 
lows: ‘‘The introduction of any derivative, 
oblique case, or national paronym, practically 
renders the introducer responsible for the actual 
or potential Latin antecedent of such words, in 
accordance with the usual rules of derivation 
and paronymy.’’ I trust the discussion may 
continue until all doubts are removed. The 
case is the more urgent in view of the confusion 
of students in finding not merely that Amphibia 
and Batrachia are synonyms for the entire class, 
