1890. ] Geology and Paleontology. 569 
“ The point I wish to make is that the upper Missouri section of the 
Cretaceous is distinctly recognizable as far south as central Colorado. 
Beyond that southward the Fox Hills thins out until it disappears in 
New Mexico, but the other members of this section can be recognized 
without any difficulty in front of the Rocky Mountains and around 
their southern end to the Rio Grande.”’ 
Pror. E. D. Cope said: ‘‘ It seems to become more complicated the 
more we investigate, and a greater number of problems arise to be 
solved. What Professor Stevenson has just stated is established. I 
can demonstrate from my own observation what Dr. Hayden has stated 
—that is, the conformity of the four or five gradations with the Lara- 
mie above. ‘There seems to be absolutely no disturbance or want of 
conformity in the upper Missouri between those three horizons. I 
could get the Pierre fossils in the bottom of the bluff and Fox Hills 
in the middle and Laramie at the top. On the question of the Lara- 
mie’s position in the Cretaceous or Tertiary series the vertebrate fossils 
throw some light. The reptiles and saurians are Cretaceous. I have 
discovered in New Mexico the Puerco series just above the Laramie, 
and in that I have about a hundred species of the mammalia. I have 
also discovered mammalia in the Laramie. Professor Marsh has added 
some species to those previously known. ‘These species are of identical 
character with the Puerco mammals, although there is no species iden- 
tical with any in the Puerco, where there is not a single Cretaceous 
reptile. The mammals of the Laramie are, like the saurians, rather 
Cretaceous than Tertiary ; but the character is not so ) propcuntsu. ee 
Bulletin Geol. Soc. Amer., Vol. T. 
Prof. Marsh on Hallopus and other Dinosaurs.—lIn the 
May number of the American Journal of Science a paper is published 
by Prof. Marsh, entitled, “ Distinctive Characters of the Order Hallo- 
poda.” The conclusions which I have reached, after a study of the 
.type specimen, do not agree at all with those of the Professor. I 
cannot find sufficient evidence for the correctness of the following 
statements 
$. “There were but four digits in the manus, the first being short 
and stout, and the other slender.”’ 
2. “The fibula was slender and complete, but tapered much from 
above downward. Its position was not in front of the tibia below, 
as in all known Dinosaurs, but its lower extremity was outside, and 
apparently somewhat behind, the tibia.” 
