Recoed of Geology of Texas, 1887-1896. 
187 
Kennedy, W. 
and the Fayette deposits, apart from any chemical evidence whatever, hears 
out the assumption of these two divisions being derived from the Creta- 
ceous. If we accept Dr. Penrose’s theory that the iron ores and glauco- 
nite of the marine beds are largely due to the destruotion of the upper 
glauconitic division or the green-sand of the Cretaceous, and in this theory, 
from a long period of work among these beds, I am inclined to believe for 
several reasons — ^one of which being the close affinity chemically and other- 
wise of these beds. Then that will in a great measure dispose of the origin 
of the middle great division.” 
The conditions attendant upon the deposition of the Yegua clays and the 
Lignitic beds. Oomparison of oompo.sition of lignitie clays and greensand 
marls. 
‘Trom this, then, it would appear that while the greater portions of 
these claysi and sands are derived from Cretaceous materials, these have 
been mixed with a small quantity of ingredients belonging to some of the 
older formations through which the larger rivers ran; but the proportions 
of these older materials were so small as not to visibly affect the deposit 
as whole.” 
The opinion is advanced that neither the syenitic rocks of Arkansas nor 
the basaltic outbreaks of the Texas Cretaceous forms the source of the 
clays.* 
277. • 
Tbe Age of the Iron Ores of E'ast Texas. 
Read before the Texas Academy of Science, Dec. 16, 1893. 
Science, Yol. XXIII, pp. 22-25. Jan. 12, 1894. 
The brown iron or limonite area of East Texas. Age of the deposits. 
Pumpelly assigns them to the Quaternary (Vol. 15, 10th Census). Proba- 
ble reasons for this assignment. The work of Lawrence C. Johnson (Iron 
Ores of 'Northern Louisiana and Eastern Texas (House Ex. Doc. No. 195, 
50th Cong., 1st Sess.) “This investigator appears to have been the first to 
recognize the existence of two divisions among the ores. These he sepa- 
rated, assigning the name of nodular ore to the one variety, and by the 
term lacustrine designated the other. This latter class he again divided 
into ‘laminated’ and ‘buff crumbly’ ores, according to their texture and 
physical appearance. 
“While dividing the ores into these two great divisions, he at the same 
time placed them in different ages and under entirely different conditions. 
The nodular ore Mr. Johnson considered as belonging to the lignitie Ter- 
tiary, and we 'find him, after describing the ores of Marion county, saying: 
‘All this portion of the iron field, including Upshur, ,Camp, Morris, Marion, 
and Cass counties, is assigned to the great Lignitic of the Geological 
column.’” (Loc. cit., p. 34.) 
“The laminated ore, or, as he described it, the lacustrine ore, Mr. John- 
son appears to place in the Quaternary, as, after describing the conditions 
and modes of formation and deposition of such ores, he says; ‘iSuch 
deposits were produced at various stages of the Quaternary history of the 
