﻿GEOLOGY OF THOUSAND ISLANDS REGION 



185 



other an amphibolite slightly soaked by granite, and their analyses 

 appear herewith. Each, in the field, was classified as plainly a 

 soaked rock, in which the constituents were merged. Each was 

 also merely a phase in a gradual increase in amount of soaking, 

 plainly to be traced in the field, and the two samples were chosen 

 from among many because of unusual freshness. 



Si0 2 .. 



AI2O3. 



Fe 2 3 . 



FeO... 



MgO. . 



CaO.. . 



Na 2 0., 



K 2 0... 



H 2 + 



H 2 0— 



Ti0 2 .. 



Zr0 2 . . 



P 2 5 .. 



CI 



F 



S 



MnO.. 

 BaO... 



73 

 14 



10 

 29 



04 

 04 



53 

 18 

 08 

 36 

 54 

 07 

 18 



•°3 



■°3 

 ,02 

 02 

 07 



100.58 



70.13 



15-47 



1.52 



1. 05 



.85 



1 .60 



3-7 2 



4-39 



.48 



.01 



•30 



•05 

 .09 

 .07 

 .08 

 •05 



99.86 



56.58 



15-54 



3.80 



5-4i 



2.77 



4-5 6 



2 .91 



4-25 



.80 



. 10 



1. 71 



.01 



■87 

 . 12 



.14 

 .44 

 .09 

 .08 



100. 18 



51.42 



17.42 



3- 6 4 



5-i4 



5- 1 * 



1.76 

 •74 

 ■33 

 •74 

 .09 



•25 

 .01 



-71 

 •13 

 . 10 



•23 

 .16 



•13 



50.83 

 18.64 



.84 

 97 

 ,90 



5° 

 22 



83 



1 .40 



1 . 10 



03 



.01 



. 10 



11 C0 2 



99.48 



Note. Cr 2 3 and C0 2 absent. 



1 Laurentian granite gneiss of Alexandria bathylith, from column 4 of 

 original table. 



2 Laurentian granite gneiss of Antwerp bathylith, slightly soaked with 

 amphibolite, column 5 of original table. 



3 Amphibolite, somewhat soaked by granite, from railroad cut 4 miles 

 north of Redwood (8L,2a, Alexandria sheet). E. W. Morley, analyst. 



4 Amphibolite, from same railroad cut (8L2B, Alexandria sheet). 

 E. W. Morley, analyst. 



5 Amphibolite described by Adams as representing the extreme stage in 

 the alteration of crystalline limestone into amphibolite by contact action of 

 the Glamorgan bathylith, Jour. Geo. 17:2. 



It is not thought that the amphibolite of analysis 4 is an altered 

 limestone, but rather a member of the schist series, though likely a 

 calcareous shale, even perhaps an impure limestone. In any case 

 its similarity in composition with the amphibolite described by 

 Adams from Maxwells Crossing is quite striking, the somewhat 

 higher magnesia and potash being the most prominent differences. 



