824 E. O. CLRICH CORRELATIONS OF CHESTER FORMATIONS 



the area in southern Kentucky between Somerset and Cumberland River, 

 where also we succeeded in finding much of what we hoped to see. 



From here we went to Crittenden County, in western Kentucky, where 

 I desired to see again the locality near Levias at which "Weller and Butts 

 had claimed that I had made the almost unpardonable error of mistaking 

 the Rosiclare sandstone for the Bethel. But, as I have already shown, 

 this visit proved that, in this case at least, the facts are essentially as I 

 reported them in 1917. 



From Levias then we traveled by auto to Golconda, on the Illinois side 

 of the Ohio, and from there to Anna, in Union County. There we most 

 fortunately met Messrs. Kray and Boos, of the Illinois State Survey, 

 who were engaged in mapping the Dongola quadrangle. They were both 

 full of desirable information and anxious to acquire any we might be able 

 to give them ; so we spent three very busy and profitable clays in this area. 



Finally, we went to Sainte Genevieve County, in Missouri, where again 

 we saw some things that looked a little different on this occasion and 

 others that we had overlooked entirely before. 



Mentally reviewing the general results of the past season's work at 

 these widely separated localities, I feel warranted in saying that we found 

 nothing requiring any great change of views previously published by me. 

 I now hold essentially, if not precisely, the same views concerning the 

 relations of the Sainte Genevieve limestone to the Chester that I held in 

 1905 and reiterated in greater detail in 1917. The only change is by 

 addition of much new evidence from localities in eastern Kentucky and 

 Alabama, all of which is favorable to these views. But the mentioned 

 discoveries in Missouri and further information acquired during the past 

 season in Union and Johnson counties, in Illinois, inject some uncer- 

 tainty into previously advocated correlations of the Aux Vases and Bethel 

 sandstones and regarding the relations of other thinner beds of sand- 

 stone and of beds of limestone and shale that lie above the Aux Vases 

 sandstone in Missouri and also above a sandstone in Union County, on 

 the Illinois side of the Mississippi, that I regard as corresponding to the 

 Aux Vases. I am less satisfied now than I was with previously enter- 

 tained but unpublished beliefs regarding the relations of these Union 

 County beds to formations found in Hardin County to the east and to 

 those across the Ohio in western Kentucky. Professor Weller's views in 

 these cases, as nearly as I can learn from his published reports and other 

 information, also seem to fail in meeting the facts. In short, the infor- 

 mation now in hand suggests difficulties and possibilities not contem- 

 plated hitherto by either of us. Perhaps in some of our differences the 

 truth lies somewhere between us. However, I shall present the facts as 



