Record of Geology of Texas, ISS'Z-ISQG. 
145 
Hill, Robert T. 
not only the whole section of previous writers often visible in connected 
exposure, hut a new and lower group of the marine Cretaceous beneath 
the hitherto recognized groups.. 
‘‘In this journal of January, 1887, I first called attention to the fact 
that the current ideas of the relations, of the Cretaceous strata of Texas 
were errioneous. In a paper read before the Philosophical Society of Wash- 
ington, January 29, 1887, I published a local section, typical of the whole 
region, including the strata from the Tertiary to the Carboniferous, and a 
condensed summary of the paleontology, stratigraphy and literature of the 
Cretaceous strata of Texas. I demonstrated the transitional position these 
strata occupied between the Atlantic States bordering upon the Gulf of 
iMexico and those of the 'Rocky Alountain region, and showed the existence 
there of a deep marine group of the Cretaceous, which is older than any hith- 
erto reeo'gmized on this continent. In a paper read before the Philadelphia 
Academy of Soience, February 5, 1887, Dr. C. A. White published a resume 
of the section furnished him by me for that purpose, together with some 
brief deductions thereon and some correlations of his own. In the present 
paper, to which the former was but introductory, I propose to diagnose 
more .clearly this lower .group, and to explain many new features of it which 
throw much light upon the American Cretaceous section.” Pp. 289-290. 
The Austin-New Braunfels Non-conformity. “This non-conformity is 
clearly and unmistakably visible in and near Austin, San Marcos, Heliotes 
and New 'iBraunfels ; and this relation of the strata, which .is the same 
along the face of the escarpment from Austin to Rio Grande, is dia- 
metrically opposite to that originally announced by Roemer (and accepted 
by fShumard .and .other writers down to the present .day) [with the exception 
of Professor E. D. Cope], who made the .Cretaceous of the plain at the 
- foot of the highlands .older than that of the plateau, and to extend un.der 
it, as s.hown in the following dia.gram. This error, which was the funda- 
mental cause of the confusion of knowledge concerning the Texas Creta- 
ceous formation, has existed since Roemer’s time.” Pp. 292-293. 
The Upper Division of the Texas Cretaceous. Its char.acters and paleon- 
tology. List of Fossils. 
. Middle Division of the Texas Cretaceous. Lithologic characters. Source 
of the confusion in Dr. B. F. Shumard’s composite section. Fossils in the 
shales at Austin, Eagle Ford and New Braunfels. Contacts on the south 
banks of the Colorado .at Austin, .and .in the east bank of Shoal Creek. 
Faunal and stratigraphic break. The Lower Cross Timber Series wanting 
south of Waco. Meek on the relative age of the Dakota Sandstone of the 
Rocl^ Mountains .and the Cross Timber beds. Fauna of the Middle Divis- 
ion of the Cretaceous. 
The Lower Division of the Texas Cretaceous. “The harder limestones, 
seen underneath the Lower Cros.s Timber beds at Fort Worth and Denison 
and the shales at Austin, and forming the face and plateau of the esearp- 
ment, are the undoubted top of the Oomanche series of my former paper. 
This great formation, which eonstitutes the face of the escarpment and 
the great plateau at its top, covers or once covered the whole of the central 
region as far west as the Rocky Mountain region. This group of strata 
embraces thousands of feet of deep marine sediments, and extends over 
