PREVIOUS OBSERVERS. O 



seen reason to doubt its being- entirely so, if not there, at least elsewhere 

 trans-Indus. 



Another number of the Palseontologia Indica, Ser. xiii, fasc. 1, has been 

 recently issued, in which Dr. Waagen introduces his descriptions and 

 figures of the Salt Range fossils, with several observations upon the 

 geology of the Salt Range and upon my classification of its rocks as 

 well as other matters. The intimate connection between the Salt Range 

 series and its continuation in the trans-Indus hills is sufficient ground for 

 noticing here the manner in which misrepresentations and errors are 

 attributed to me and to the language of my report. 



It is repeatedly endeavoured to be shown that I have illogically 

 represented the Salt Range series to be the full equivalent of the forma- 

 tions composing the geological scale elsewhere. This is simply not the 

 case. I have referred the various fossiliferous formations of the series 

 to different geological horizons upon the evidence afforded by the 

 palaeontological officers of the survey (of whom Dr. Waagen was one) , 

 and by other palaeontologists also, as to the fossil fauna of each group. 

 My general classification was made known to Dr. Waagen ; and to none 

 of the separations as to age or position did he then offer the least 

 objection. 



In chapter iii of my Report, when describing the stratigraphic series 

 of the Salt Range, I avoided using the word "formations " lest it should 

 convey too much of identity with the geological scale elsewhere, calling 

 the sub-divisions instead "rock groups.'" I mentioned (pages 280, 281, 

 of Report) merely the periods to which the divisions may be referred, 

 and distinctly stated that " there is no reason why either of the two 

 groups beneath the carboniferous should be called devonian or old-red- 

 sandstone.'" From this alone it will be seen how impossible is the state- 

 ment that I considered the whole palaeozoic series represented. 



Dr. Waagen now proposes a triple classification, in which nothing 

 more definite as to age is indicated than that the uppermost division, 

 including groups 9 and 10 of my list, is composed of newer mesozoic 

 formations, while the silurian group, determined by Drs. Oldham and 



( 215 ) 



