426 Scientific Intelligence. 
this Journal (xxviii, 256), a notice of Marcou’s Memoir entitled “ Dyas et 
Trias,” &c. The same author now reviews the arguments then used, 
and enforces it by new linnentiaies in a paper entitled, ‘On the inappli- 
ig of the New Term Dyas to the Permian group of rocks as pro- 
posed by Dr. Geinitz.’ He aims to show that the term Dyas can be used 
only in open violation of all well established paleontological values— 
that it rests on certain lithological distinctions not essential or constant 
and is more objectionable than the kindred term ‘Trias. 
He says “In borrowing the term ‘Dyas’ from Marcou, Dr. Geinitz 
” . After Sobies the reasons which in 1840-41 led him and his 
associates De Verneuil and Count Keyserling to propose the term “ Per- 
mian” for the great group of sandstones, marls, pebble beds, vet 
regions besides Russia, the series of sands, pebbles, maria, an 
rt apie ta Sonat ialy, in _pthers a + Dyas, in a third By Trias, and in & 
ities a T 
tracts the 
n these countries, > ee the Trias of Alberti bevel tract as 
% is there- 
fore a Dyas though here again the Geological Surveyors have divided 
themselves in describing the order of the strata and 
‘fossil contents of the group under in th I claim no other iol 
bo mee edit., 1859, and ‘Russia in Europe and the Ural Mountains, 
