EASTERN AND SOUTHERN UNITED STATES. 
135 
evidence on this point is not yet absolutely confirmatory. Most of the fossils* 
obtained by Lyell from the face of Shell Bluff are forms that have been identified as 
exponents of the typical Eocene — “ Claibornian ” and Buhrstone — but we are not 
clearly informed what relative position these held to the Georgiana layer, or the layer 
containing the giant oyster. More direct information on the point in question is given 
by E,uffin,t who asserts that the oyster-bed, with a development of 4-6 feet, occupies 
the top marl layer of the bluff overlying what he unhesitatingly calls the “ Great 
Carolinian bed,” and which, as we have already seen, is the correspondent in part or 
in whole of the “Jacksonian.” If these observations are to be trusted in their entirety, 
then there can be but very little room left for speculation on the subject — either 
the oyster layer forms a part of the Jackson series, or belongs to a deposit of newer 
age, doubtless the Vicksburg (or Oligocene). 
Miocene. — The post-Eocene Tertiary deposits of South Carolina, considered by 
Tuomcy and Holmes to be of Pliocene age, but here referred to the Miocene, occupy, 
as seen by their outcrops, principally the northeast section of the State, and are most 
largely developeii in Horry, Marion, Darlington, and Sumter districts. As in North 
Carolina they appear mostly in isolated patches, filling depressions in the underlymg 
Eocene or Cretaceous strata, either along exposed river sections, or on elevated spots 
that have effectually resisted denudation. South of the Santee River the formation 
lias been traced on the Cooper and some of its tributaries, extending within a few 
miles of the city of Charleston, and an outlier is noted by Mr. Tuomey as existing on 
the Edisto below Givham’s Ferry. Unfortunately the actual extent of the formation 
under consideration is not sufficiently well known to permit of its accurate representa- 
tion on the map, and, therefore, the boundaries there indicated must still be considered 
in a measure hypothetical. It appears not unlikely that a connecting tract of Miocene 
exists between the Georgia and South Carolina areas ; at any rate, the Edisto deposit 
above referred to would seem to indicate such connection. 
Georgia. 
No accurate detail work on the Tertiary geology or paleontology of this State 
has thus far been attempted ; at any rate, no results of such work, if made, have 
as yet been published. Our knowledge of the subject is still, therefore, mainly 
of a general or fragmentary character, and not sufficiently precise to permit of its use 
in either definitely locating the boundaries or defining the approximate extents of the 
various formations. It is, however, positive that we have here representatives of both 
Eocene and Miocene, and not unlikely the former is represented in all or nearly all the 
* Oliva Alabamensis, Pyrula sp., Tiirb nella (Voluta) prisca, Melongena alveata, Infundibuhim trochiforme, 
Natica ffitites, Crepidula lirata, Dentalinin tballoides, Ostrea sellssformis, Niicula magnifica, Cardita rotimda, C. 
planicosta, Cra>satella protexte, Lucina pandata, Cytherea perovata, C. Poulsoni, Lutraiia lapidosa. Lyell, Q. 
J. Geol. Soc., 1, p. 437. 
f Kept. Agriciilt. Surv. of South Carolina, 1843, pp. 33-3 and 34. 
