134 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES TO FOSSIL ESTHERLE. 



II. Musehelkalk. {Encrinus UUiformis, &c.) Guttenstein-limestone, &c. 



III. Buntsandstein Formation . 



' 1. Haselgebirgschichten ; with Gypsum and Rocksalt. \E. 

 minuta!] 



2. Buntsandstein ; with Myophoria vulgaris and Myacites 



Fassaensis. [E. minuta.~\ 



3. Alpenmelaphyr (Trap-rocks). 



The analogous groups of strata in the Tyrol and other parts of the Alps are indicated by 

 Ilerr Giimbel's tables at pages 116 and 192. 



Gumbel states that Posidonornya minuta [Estheria minuta] occurs in the " Buntsandstein " 

 on both sides of the Alps (pp. 155 and 181) ; that it occurs in the Lettenkeuper of the 

 Bavarian Alps, at the Partnachthal-Enge (p. 219) ; in the Lower Keuper-liraestone at the 

 Heiterwand, near Imst (p. 225) ; in the Lower Shell-keuper at the following localities : — " Wet- 

 tersteinalp bei Garmisch ; Hinterriessthal am grossen Falken ; Fermesbach unter Schlageck ; 

 Hochalpe unter der Alpspitze ; Gasfeld am Daumen im Algau " (p. 273). 



V. In treating of the history of the deposits containing Estheria ovata (pages 84 et seq.), 

 by inadvertence no mention is made of the opinions expressed by M. Jules Marcou as to the 

 age of these beds. In the ' Bulletin de la Soc, Geol. de la France/ 2e ser., vol. vi, 1819, and in 

 his ' Geological Map of the United States ' (Boston, 1853), M. Marcou referred the Coal- 

 formation of Richmond, Virginia, to the Lias or the Keuper. In his " Resume explicatif d'une 

 carte geologique des Etats-Unis," &c, 1855 ('Bull. Soc. Geol. France/ 2e ser., vol. xii), he 

 referred this coal to the Keuper. In his ' Lettre sur la Jura/ Zurich, December, 1857, after 

 noticing Prof. Emmons's views of the age of the Coal-formation of Eastern Virginia and of 

 North and South Carolina (see ' Monograph/ p. 90), he states that he had himself referred it to 

 the New Red Sandstone series, in 1853, and that Von Buch held the same opinion. In his 

 ' Geology of North America/ 4to, Zurich, 1858, he referred the Red Sandstone of Connecticut, 

 &c, and the Coal-formation of Eastern Virginia, &c, to the Keuper, and, in a note at p. 13, 

 gave a history of his opinions on the subject (with remarks on those of the Profs. Rogers) ; 

 and here he also quoted O. Heer's remarks on the Triassic relationship of some fossil plants 

 collected by him in Chesterfield County, Virginia, and C. Bunbury's reasons for having been 

 induced, in 1847, to regard the Virginian fossil plants as Liassic (some specimens being 

 imperfect, and the Basle and Baireuth plant-beds being at that time classed with the Lias). In 

 his ' Reply to the Criticisms of J. D. Dana/ 1859, M. Marcou, in mentioning the " New Red in 

 North Carolina and Virginia/' again refers to Prof. Heer's letter on the fossil plants, and explains 

 how it passed into * Silliman's American Journal.' Lastly, in his ' Dyas et Trias/ 1859, he quotes 

 and accepts Prof. Emmons's classification of the strata of the Carolina Coal-formation as Triassic 

 and Permian, and explains at large his opinion that the Permian and Trias ought to be regarded 

 as one great system, belonging rather to the Secondary or Mcsozoic than to the Palaeozoic 

 period. 



