﻿212 
  E. 
  W. 
  Berry 
  — 
  Age 
  of 
  the 
  Brandon 
  Lignite. 
  

  

  Vermont, 
  and 
  also 
  except 
  for 
  the 
  Pleistocene, 
  the 
  only 
  

   trace 
  of 
  post-Paleozoic 
  deposits 
  in 
  that 
  state. 
  

  

  Hitchcock 
  submitted 
  samples 
  of 
  the 
  wood 
  to 
  Professor 
  

   Bailey, 
  who 
  pronounced 
  them 
  to 
  be 
  exclusively 
  dicotyle- 
  

   donous; 
  and 
  fruits 
  to 
  Lesquereux, 
  who 
  published 
  an 
  

   account 
  of 
  them 
  in 
  1861 
  3 
  and 
  freely 
  discussed 
  their 
  prob- 
  

   able 
  age. 
  Fifty 
  years 
  later 
  Knowlton 
  published 
  addi- 
  

   tional 
  notes 
  and 
  announced 
  the 
  presence 
  of 
  coniferous 
  

   wood. 
  4 
  During 
  the 
  coal 
  strike 
  of 
  1902-1903 
  the 
  old 
  work- 
  

   ings 
  were 
  reopened 
  and 
  G. 
  H. 
  Perkins, 
  the 
  State 
  Geolo- 
  

   gist 
  of 
  Vermont, 
  was 
  thereby 
  enabled 
  to 
  secure 
  an 
  unpar- 
  

   alleled 
  collection 
  of 
  the 
  fruits, 
  which 
  he 
  described 
  and 
  

   figured 
  in 
  several 
  admirable 
  papers 
  published 
  in 
  1905 
  

   and 
  1906, 
  5 
  together 
  with 
  geological 
  notes 
  by 
  Dale 
  and 
  

   Woodworth, 
  and 
  an 
  account 
  of 
  the 
  microscopic 
  character 
  

   of 
  some 
  of 
  the 
  lignites 
  by 
  Jeffrey 
  & 
  Chrysler. 
  6 
  

  

  With 
  this 
  brief 
  synopsis 
  of 
  the 
  history 
  of 
  the 
  investi- 
  

   gations 
  I 
  turn 
  briefly 
  to 
  a 
  consideration 
  of 
  the 
  views 
  

   regarding 
  the 
  age 
  of 
  the 
  deposits. 
  Opinion 
  has 
  been 
  

   almost 
  unanimous 
  from 
  the 
  first 
  that 
  the 
  deposit 
  was 
  of 
  

   Tertiary 
  age, 
  and 
  this 
  conclusion 
  appears 
  to 
  me 
  to 
  be 
  

   indisputable. 
  Hitchcock 
  stated 
  with 
  some 
  slight 
  reserva- 
  

   tion 
  that 
  the 
  deposit 
  was 
  Pliocene 
  or 
  newer 
  Tertiary, 
  and 
  

   made 
  the 
  rather 
  bold 
  assertion 
  that 
  it 
  represented 
  a 
  

   marine 
  Tertiary 
  formation 
  that 
  extended 
  from 
  Canada 
  

   to 
  Alabama, 
  the 
  latter 
  opinion 
  being 
  based 
  upon 
  the 
  wide 
  

   distribution 
  of 
  limonite 
  or 
  brown 
  hematite, 
  really 
  of 
  

   diverse 
  origin 
  and 
  without 
  bearing 
  on 
  the 
  question. 
  

  

  Hitchcock 
  was 
  undoubtedly 
  influenced 
  in 
  reaching 
  an 
  

   opinion 
  regarding 
  the 
  age 
  of 
  the 
  lignite 
  by 
  Lesquereux, 
  

   who 
  had 
  identified 
  five 
  out 
  of 
  a 
  total 
  of 
  twenty-three 
  then 
  

   known 
  forms 
  with 
  European 
  Miocene 
  species, 
  chiefly 
  from 
  

   Oeningen 
  in 
  Baden 
  (Tortonian 
  stage). 
  At 
  the 
  same 
  time, 
  

   Lesquereux 
  noted 
  resemblances 
  to 
  plants 
  from 
  the 
  

   "upper 
  lignitic 
  formation 
  which 
  extends 
  on 
  both 
  sides 
  of 
  

   the 
  Mississippi, 
  and 
  which 
  I 
  had 
  opportunity 
  to 
  explore 
  

  

  Lesquereux, 
  L., 
  Fossil 
  Fruits 
  from 
  Lignites 
  at 
  Brandon, 
  Vermont, 
  this 
  

   Journal, 
  (2) 
  vol. 
  32, 
  pp. 
  355-363, 
  1861: 
  Geology 
  of 
  Vermont, 
  vol. 
  2, 
  pp. 
  

   712-71:;, 
  1861. 
  

  

  1 
  Knowlton, 
  F. 
  IT., 
  Notes 
  on 
  the 
  Fossil 
  Fruits 
  and 
  Lignites 
  at 
  Brandon, 
  

   Vermont, 
  Bull. 
  Torroy 
  Bot. 
  Club, 
  vol. 
  29, 
  pp. 
  635-641, 
  pi. 
  25, 
  1902. 
  

  

  Perkins, 
  G. 
  M., 
  l>V|>t. 
  State 
  Geol. 
  1903-1904, 
  pp. 
  153-162, 
  174-212, 
  t. 
  f. 
  8, 
  

   pis. 
  7.1 
  SI: 
  I.lcn, 
  for 
  1905-1906, 
  pp. 
  188-194, 
  201-230, 
  pis. 
  46-48, 
  52-58: 
  

   Bull. 
  Geol. 
  8oc. 
  Am., 
  vol. 
  16, 
  pp. 
  449-516, 
  pis. 
  86, 
  87, 
  1905. 
  

  

  "Jeffrey 
  & 
  Chrysler 
  in 
  Perkins, 
  Rept. 
  State 
  Geol. 
  for 
  1905-1906, 
  pp. 
  195- 
  

   201, 
  pis. 
  49-51. 
  

  

  