275 



S^Shale. olive 6 



7 — Limestone, hard 4 



6— Shale, olive 8 



5 — Limestoue, four layers, cross-bedded, hard crystal- 

 line, fossiliferous 3 



• 4 — Limestone, cross-bedded and brecciated 2 



'i — Shale parting with a limestone lens 0-10 



2 — Limestone, hard, fossiliferons. brecciated, so-called 



"marble" 3 9 



1— Sandstone, slialy 2 6 



IX. 7 — Sandstone, even bedded . . . . ;-t~. . . 40 zb 



G — Limestone 20 



n — Shale, sandy or argilL, weathers red in places .30zb 



4 — Covered 25 



3 — Limestone, thin-bedded 5 



2 — Sandstone, thin intercalation 2-G 



1 — Limestone, oolitic, probably Mitchell 10 



X. 3 — Covered slope to track, sandstom^ in lower pni't and 



probably all sandstone 40 



2 — Limestone 17 



1 — Covered slope and sandstone to Richland Creek. ... 00 



DISCUSSION OF STRATIGRAPHY. 



When the attempt to nnravel the stratigraphy of tlu' group was begun, 

 some trouble was encountered: (1) the unconformity which limits the 

 group at the top; (2) the deposit of glacial drift in the area bordering 

 Richland Creek; (3) the solution of the underlying Mitchell limestone on 

 the eastern border, developing large folds and the collapse of strata; (4) 

 solution of the limestone layers in the Solsberry formation; and (5) the 

 fact that the Solsberry sandstones and shales have a tendency to be 

 more or less cross-bedded and lenticular, as would be expected of a shore 

 deposit. These factors detract somewhat from the correct interpretation 

 of the stratigraphy. 



Sections in the underlying Mitchell limestone in the region studied 

 show that in most cases the toj) of the latter formation consists of a very 

 Typical white oolite, differing inntcrially from tliat of the Chester. Ash- 



