504 G. H. PERKINS — TERTIARY LIGNITE OF BRANDON, VERMONT 



In a letter dated December 10, 1852, Professor J. W. Bailey stated 

 that " the woods are not coniferous and do not present characters by 

 which I can distinguish them from any ductiferous woods." 



In 1861 Mr Lesquereux wrote as follows concerning a piece of the 

 lignite which had been sent to him : 



" The wood, though somewhat hardened and blackened, is still in a good state 

 of preservation. It is soft enough to be cut with a knife, or at least easily broken, 

 and by a section shows on both sides the characters of dicotyledonous wood." 



In the article by Professor Knowlton referred to on page 500, we find 

 him saying of the pieces which he examined that " a large portion of 

 the lignite is undoubtedly coniferous in character." Still this author 

 describes and figures " one small, but well preserved piece that is dicoty- 

 ledonous." 



A series, including numerous samples taken from as many different 

 pieces of lignite as possible, was sent to Dr E. C. Jeffrey, of the Harvard 

 Botanical Laboratories. While Doctor Jeffrey's examination is not yet 

 completed, he writes of that which he has studied as follows : 



" Most of it is a species of Lauroxylon. There is one small piece of coniferous 

 wood and a good deal of dicotyledonous material in which only the medullary 

 rays show any structure." 



The fossil fruits found in and with the lignite are mostly those of ex- 

 ogenous trees ; a few may be from coniferous trees and a few from palms 

 or allied species. 



The only explanation which suggests itself, in view of the discrepancy 

 in the above quotations, seems to be that lignite from one part of the 

 deposit may be quite different from that taken in another part and at a 

 different time. As has been noted, Doctor Knowlton considered much 

 of the lignite which he examined as a variety of that from southern 

 Russia named by Schmalhausen Pityoxylon microporosum, and for the 

 Vermont lignite Doctor Knowlton proposes the name given by Schmal- 

 hausen, adding the variety name of brandonianum. This name, how- 

 ever, can not apply to more than a comparatively small part of the 

 Brandon material. 



Fossils of the Brandon Lignite 



difficulty of obtaining specimens 



As has been stated, the lignite deposit is covered heavily by drift, and 

 consequently it is not ordinarily possible to get at it. Were the material 

 itself of sufficient value to warrant mining, the fossils would probably 

 become very common, but they can only be obtained when digging for 

 kaolin or some other associated deposit. For this reason the fossils 





