281 
geological one, that will successfully explain the peculiarly local, 
often endemic, nature of the pine-barrens. 
Others have also sought geological explanation for the origin 
of this region, and one paleobotanist was the first to suggest 
the possibility of there being any relationship between the flora 
and the geology of southern New Jersey? It was Hollick's 
suggestion that the pine-barrens are co-extensive with the 
Tertiary sands and gravels that Stone's work shows must be 
revised. Recent collections, the significance of which was, of 
course, unknown to Hollick in 1899, have led to the abandon- 
ment of his theory that the ріпе-Баггепѕ ‘ог “coniferous zone" 
are co-extensive with the Tertiary sands and gravels. 
Much later, we find Harshberger* attributing the vegetation 
about the edges of the pine-barrens to the ‘‘post Pensauken 
uplift of the New Jersey geologists," which is perfectly correct. 
But he follows Hollick in saying that ‘‘the Tertiary soils extend 
southward along the Atlantic Ocean to Florida and are occupied 
by a pine-barren flora."5 This, as Stone’s work has shown, must 
be modified. But this statement of Hollick's, subsequently 
used in Harshberger's work, contains such a large measure of 
truth in relation to the origin of this unique region, that it is 
only to be abandoned upon presentation of a theory more nearly 
fitting the known facts. While the pine-barrens do occupy 
Tertiary soils, they do not occupy all of them. It is just this 
lack of co-extensiveness of the pine-barrens in New Jersey with 
the Tertiary that has led to Mr. Stone's scepticism, and to the 
present effort to sketch what the writer believes to have been the 
sequence of geological events that has resulted in the final 
limits of the pine-barrens. | 
з Hollick, A. The relation between forestry and geology in New Jersey. Am. 
Nat. 33: I-14, with map. 1899. 
4 Harshberger, J. W. Phytogeographic Survey of N. Am. 219. 191І. 
5 Harshberger, J. W. loc. cit. 218. 
