40 



THE DEVONIAN AND CARBONIFEROUS. 



[bull. 80. 



(5) Olive sandstone and slate of Salmon Biver, Oswego County (these 

 two, 4 and 5 were recognized as equivalents of " the fourth group in 

 the slate system of Wales," as defined in Phillip's Encyclopaedia Metro- 

 politana, article Geology, p. 568.) 



(6) The black limestone and shale of Trenton, the " Birdseye lime- 

 stone," and " caleiferous sand rock" of Eaton, and the grauwacke and 

 slate of Hudson River, he recognized as equivalent to the " Llandeilo 

 flags " of Murchison. 1 



In this report, also, thirteen species of fossils are described from the 

 first group above, which he regarded as equivalent to the Ludlow. 2 



The localities given are Norwich, Cazenovia, Madison, and Sher- 

 burne. Since all these localities are Devonian localities, and the fossils 

 are Devonian fossils, it is evident that in 1838, the paleontologist Con- 

 rad regarded these Devonian rocks as equivalent to the Ludlow group 

 of the Upper Silurian of Murchison. 



Lardner Vanuxem reported for the third district 3 and appears to fol- 

 low Eaton's nomenclature, except in a few new names, like " Trenton 

 limestone," which had already been published. Fossils are given ior 

 "Trenton limestone, black shale," "green shale and sandstone," "upper 

 limestone," " white sandstone" (which can be recognized as the Oris- 

 kany). The species in this report were evidently determined by 

 Conrad. 



James Hall reported for the fourth district. This, it will be remem- 

 bered, includes the rocks of the State from Cayuga Lake westward. 

 These rocks were regarded as equivalents of the Old Red sandstone 

 and Carboniferous groups, and stratigraphically above the Silurian sys- 

 tem of Murchison. 4 Some erroneous identifications, however, are evi- 

 dent; what is now the Medina sandstone was called in this report "Old 

 Red sandstone," and theCorniferous limestone was identified as "Car- 

 boniferous or Mountain limestone." 5 



W. W. Mather, in 1838, published the first annual report of the Geo- 

 logical Survey of the State of Ohio. In his identifications he mentioned 

 first the great limestone deposit, which he correlated with the "Moun- 

 tain or Carboniferous limestone" of Europe. He defined this as cover- 

 ing the western border of the State. He named a number of fossils 

 from this limestone, which are evidently erroneously identified, as the 

 formation is Silurian, and not Carboniferous, as he supposed. His 

 third formation he called " Waverly sandstone series." Other points 

 of the correlation were made, as " conglomerates," and also an "upper 

 coal series," but it is particularly important to notice that originally 

 the formations called " Carboniferous limestone" in America were not 

 correctly identified. 



The second annual report of the Geological Survey of Ohio was 



1 N. Y. Geol. Surv., 2d Rop., p. 114. 



2 Ibid., p. 116. 



8 Ibid., pp. 253-286. 



4 Ibid., p. 201. 



"See "map along the Genessoe River from Rochester southward." 



