466 R. T. Hill — The alleged Jurassic of Texas. 



older writers were correct in their affirmation of the Creta- 

 ceous age of the alleged Jurassic beds of New Mexico. 



From 1867 to 1884 there was a cessation in the flow of pub- 

 lication from Professor Marcou's fertile pen, which did not 

 resume until after the appearance of the writer's first papers 

 on the geology of the Texas region, in 1886, after I had en- 

 deavored to give a resume of Marcou's work in Oklahoma and 

 JNTew Mexico.*" In attempting to give him credit, however, I 

 apparently started Professor Marcou's pen again — which he 

 resumed, after seventeen years of silence during which his 

 history was a blank to me. Since this time his contributions 

 have been as frequent and pointed as before. Time does not 

 permit me to enumerate or refer to all of Professor Marcou's 

 publications. They are all marked by similar statements to 

 those given in the article which has brought forth this paper, 

 only differing in the violence of the personalities indulged in. 



His publications have been particularly severe in their de- 

 nunciation of all American geologists. Professor James D. 

 Dana, who has always been considered as the embodiment of 

 honor and integrity, is accused of " distorting and misrepre- 

 senting facts,"f;{; of falsifying titles of his (Marcou's) papers,"§ 

 of " persecuting! and waging war upon him," of having 

 " filled up bis Journal, since he is geological editor, with papers 

 of controversial nature, without a single observation made in 

 the field or museums" and charged with " persistent and blind 

 resistance against progress," " opposition a outrance and his 

 parti jpris to ignore a system." He also states that Dana and Hall 

 have not excuses of distance to travel over or want of facili- 

 ties and opportunities to create their colossal error." " His 

 (Dana's) efforts during 44 years have been directed to keeping 

 life in wrong conclusions and in the opposite direction of 

 the truth," and together with James Hall " has misled 

 those who followed their views by various paleontological de- 

 terminations and false classification."!" He accuses Professor 

 F. B. Meek — the ideal of exactness in paleontologic method — of 

 u mixing strata together without regard to stratigraphy, lithol- 

 ogy, or even paleontology," and states that Professor J. J. 

 Stevenson makes use of language " such as it is impossible 

 even to quote it."** 



His assaults upon American geologists reached their climax, 

 however, in his paper on "American Geological Classification 



* Bull. 52, U. S. Geological Survey. 



f"A fteply to the Criticisms of James D. Dana," by Jules Marcou, Zurich, 1859. 



\ Geology of North America, Zurich, 1858, p. 7. 



§ American Geological Classification, by Jules Marcou, Cambridge, 1888, p. 9. 



j Ibid., pp. 22, 23. 



% Ibid., p. 39. 



** American Geologist, Sept., 1889, p. 156. 



