Cor respond endence. 279 
showing a synclinal or trough in which are the outlines of an ideal ar- 
tesian basin, &c." There is no Section XX in my report. There is Fig. 
XX, and opposite to it on page 37 there are given and numbered five 
conditions necessary to an artesian flow. The first of these is as fol- 
lows: (l)"The water bearing stratum must have a continuous dip in one 
direction, or it may have a synclinal, or double dip to form a trough or 
basin." After the five conditions my report goes on to say: "These 
conditions are all shown in Fig. XX." The trough or basin is shown, 
but "t?ie continuous dip in one direction" is more emphatically shown, 
and the flow of water based upon it. The critic says: "The regular dip 
from the northwest"' is the condition of the Fort Worth-Waco area. 
There is really only one point in his review that savors of a criticism 
of the matter of the report. That is in reference to the geologic section 
of the Red river Canon. It may be the critic is right, and it may 
be, also, that in the sixteen months since the report was in preparation 
there has been some change in my own view about the much battered 
Jurassic, and that something now in the press will have a bearing on 
the subject. The matter was, as he admits, incidental! The subject of 
more than one paragraph in my report of which the Red river section is 
a small part, is the relation of a certain water bearing Tertiary forma- 
tion to the underlying formations of the plains, one point to be illustrat- 
ed being that from Nebraska to Texas these subjacent formations are 
older geologically as we proceed southerly. The illustration would not 
have been affected if instead of Jurassic I had written Permian, Devon- 
ian or Silurian. 
The animus of this reviewer is perplexing. 
Unfortunately, the edition of the report under notice is exhausted, 
and many persons will form their estimate of it from reviews. Instead, 
however, of a "review" showing the scope and character of the work 
and adding to the information conveyed, by judicious correction or sug- 
gestion, this is rather a personal attack on the knowledge and capacity 
of one of the several authors. 
Junction City, Feb. 7, 1893. Robert Hay. 
Remarks on Dalt^'s collection of Conrad's Works. Upon my return 
to Washington from a sojourn in Texas I find an article published in 
the Bulletin of the Philosophical Society of Washington, vol. xii. pp. 
215-240, entitled: Determination of the Dates of Publication of Conrad's 
"Fossils of the Tertiary Formation and Medial Tertiary," by William 
Healey Dall. {Read before the Philosophical Society, November 12, 1892.) 
In this paper the author has given much interesting information re- 
garding the respective claims of Conrad and Lea for priority in describ- 
ing the Eocene fossils at Claiborne, Ala. Moreover, the bibliographi- 
cal notes upon the two works referred to are far more exhaustive, and 
superior in every way to any heretofore published. A few slight errors, 
however, have crept into this part of the paper, and since this part has 
been a special study of mine during odd times for the past two or three 
years I feel at liberty to suggest the following corrections: 
