470 General Notes. [May 
Dakota formation, which fill the extensive hiatus which has 
hitherto existed in American geology in the region of the lower 
Cretaceous. The text of this paper having come to hand in the 
American Fournal of Science and Arts for April, further cin 
fo 
tions on it are possible. e formations discovered below the 
Dakota are referred to a single series, under the name of the 
Coma is is divided into,two divisio i eive 
new names; and these are again subdivided lithologically into 
five and four subdivisions respectively, several of which have 
been previously named by Marcou and others. The Comanche 
series is said to be “one of unbroken sedimentation and fauna 
continuity from base to top.” We fail to perceive, therefore, 
why they should be arranged in two divisions, each of which 
receives a new name, the more as no characters, faunal or litho- 
logical, are cited in support of them. 
n the same paper the Upper Cretaceous beds of Texas are 
reclassified, and the whole are arranged in an upper series, which 
includes the Cretaceous pany ee of the Gulf States. To this 
body of formations the name “ Gulf Series” is given. We must 
protest against the odei of this name also, not only be- 
cause no characteristic definition of the division is given, but 
€ 
taceous of the Atlantic States is sùsceptible of intercalation with 
the beds of the Gulf States, and the name “ Gulf Series” is not 
only inappropriate for them, but any name for them as a whole 
is unnecessary. is is because the Atlantic beds can be inter- 
calated with those of the interior of the continent. That some 
the Texan beds are identical with some of the latter is well 
known. Thus the Niobrara epoch is well represented in North-' 
ern Texas both by its well-known vertebrate fossils and its char- 
acteristic chalk, a fact apparently unknown to Mr. Hill. 
The Upper Cretaceous series is divided by Mr. Hill into four 
divisions, named respectively (beginning at the top) Navarro 
beds, Dallas Limestones, Eagle Ford Shales, and Timber Creek 
group. Of these the first two are probably identical with the 
Riply and Rotten Limestone beds of Mississippi and Alabama, 
and the Eagle Ford Shales are likely to prove to be the same as 
the Eutaw group of Hilgard, Tuomey, and others. The name 
sustained by any reasons, but, on the contrary, the writer refers 
to previous determinations by Shumard, without correction. 
‘here is enough good and new work indicated in this paper 
to satisfy the Doa of a discoverer, and to attract the at- 
tention and interest of geologists. But the author has failed to - 
appreciate the importance of observing the ordinary rules of 
nomenclature to a degree which is surprising.—. —E. D. Cope. 
