No. 402.] EVENTS IN GEOLOGIC RECORDS. 497 
As a student of geology I was long ago impressed with the 
masterly interpretation of the Brier Hill Coal Seam of Ohio as 
presented in the School of Mines Quarterly (April, 1883) by 
the late Professor Newberry. The plan, it seemed to me, was 
admirable. First, the facts were given ; then, from them, was 
translated the history. The statement of facts is a matter 
dependent upon observation ; it may be full and minute, or of 
a more general nature, according to the care and skill of the 
observer. Facts relative to the occurrence of coal in a cer- 
tain area may be simply recorded as facts, a plan pursued in 
many geologic reports, which is eminently proper from an 
economic standpoint, as it enables the practical man to locate 
seams, and that is all he desires. But, from the standpoint of 
pure science, where knowledge is the object to be attained, and 
not wealth, the point of view is different. The facts must be 
made to reveal more than the order of succession of strata, 
the areas covered, the thickness and kinds of rock composing 
the individual layers; they must be interpreted, and this must 
be, to a great extent, the work of the imagination, the revivi- 
fying of a skeleton by the addition of flesh. 
This, the speculative side of geology, if I may so call it, is 
particularly attractive to some scholars. It cultivates the same 
faculties, employs the same modes of reasoning, so widely used 
by the ethnologist, who, from the exhumed remains, ornaments, 
utensils, from the shell heaps and rude weapons, learns much 
of the habits — the life — of extinct peoples. 
Granted, then, that much must be speculative, and purely so, 
he is the best interpreter who can bring his imaginary picture 
nearest in accord with facts. Ultimately, then, the interpreta- 
tion is resolved into a matter of probability, based upon data 
furnished by observation, but it is, nevertheless, a creation of 
the mind. Herein lies one of the greatest difficulties: con- 
ceded that the observations have been carefully and properly 
made, extreme caution must be employed in drawing conclu- 
sions, lest, by a mental slip, error and not truth be the result. 
As I have already intimated, the proper interpretation of 
paleontologic evidence, supplemented by the data furnished by 
the rocks themselves, gives us a somewhat definite idea of the 
