886 W. M. Davis—Becrafts Mountain. 
on the road-side exposed the Tentaculite with a faint easterly 
ip lying with smooth contact, about ten feet long, on hard 
slaty rocks, in which the appearance of bedding was N.—5., 
dip 50° E. The face of the rocks was so weathered and jointed 
that it was difficult to make sure that the contact was a true 
unconformity and not a sh ‘ 
F. A third of a mile south of the limestones, several irregular 
mounds (a few outcrops of the limestone conglomerate were 
found on one of them) rising among the terrace flats show the 
same indurated, flinty outcrops as were found at D. Some beds 
were found standing N. 25° E., dip 40° E.S.E., and smaller out- 
crops continued toward the limestones, across the creek that 
flows out from the synclinal. These seem to show that the 
older rocks maintain a northerly strike where the limestones 
turn around toward the east. 
G. A few hundred feet southeast of the outlier, the sandy 
shales rise in small ledges, with a tolerably well-defined bed- 
ding, N. 50° E., dip 60° S.E. is conforms fairly with the 
nearest limestone, if we suppose it to have an overthrown dip, 
as is not at all improbable. . 
H. A small cutting on the side of the eastern road uncovers 
shales with a faint easterly dip. About fifteen feet higher up 
the bank the lower limestones are inclined gently to the west. 
The difference between the two is very small, and is fully 
equalled by differences in the position of adjacent limestones a 
little farther south, where the folds are crowded together. 
From this point, around the rest of the circumference, 20 
outcrops of the older rocks were found, although the whole 
distance was carefully searched. 
The observations thus detailed may be summarized as fol- 
lows: A, C, and G are non-committal; if necessary they could 
agree with either conclusion. B and H, if seen alone, would 
be taken as decisive of conformity. D, E and F imply uncon: 
formity, but with nothing of the distinctness shown in Mathers 
section. It is notable that these three outcrops show a much 
‘more indurated and irregular rock than the others; and one 
could easily suppose them to belong to a series independent of 
and unconformably below all the others, shaly sandstones aS 
well as limestones. Indeed, this seems to be the conclusion 
reached by Emmons. He wrote: “ Another limited fracture 
appears on the southeastern side of Becraft’s Mountain, about 
three miles southeast of Hudson. On one side the Taconie 
beneath which are the gray sandstones of the Hudson river 
: h n ' 
(Agriculture of New York, i, 1846, 136). The evidence of 
