Has Newark priority as a group name. — Russell. 239 
advisability of adopting a name that did not indicate relationship 
with distant formations was also pointed out. The first name on 
the list referred to, which met this requirement was, < < Newark 
group," proposed by W. C. Redfield, in 1856. That this was a 
group name intended to indicate the entire formation, is shown by 
the language used. Redfield's words are : 
' ( I propose the latter designation [Newark group] as a conven- 
ient name for these rocks [the red sandstones extending from New 
Jersey to Virginia] and to those of the Connecticut vallej^ with 
which they are thoroughly identified by foot-prints and other fos- 
sils, and I would include also, the contemporaneous sandstones of 
Virginia and North Carolina."* 
As stated in my previous paper, the term "group" has been 
adopted by the International Congress of Geologists, in a wider 
sense than was implied by Redfield. I therefore suggest that 
"system" should be substituted instead. Before offerino- this 
suggestion I made what I believe to have been an exhaustive ex- 
amination of the literature relating to the terrane in question, and 
concluded that Redfield's name had precedence over all other 
names that had been used which did not imply correlation. 
The term Newark system has recently been adopted by several 
geologists, in accordance with my suggestion, and up to the pres- 
ent time but one voice has been raised against it. In an article 
on "The use of the terms Laurentian and Newark in geological 
treatises," published in this Journal,! Prof. C. H. Hitchcock has 
formulated five objections to its acceptance. These will be con- 
sidered in the order in which the}' were presented. 
First. It is claimed that ' ' An essential feature of a name de- 
rived from a geographical locality is that the terrane should be 
exhibited there in its entirety or maximum development ; " and that 
the territory about Newark, N. J. , does not meet these require- 
ments for the Newark system. 
Without dissenting from the wisdom of the rule proposed, al- 
though a large number of exceptions could be found to it in the 
best geological memoirs, I wish to state from my own knowledge 
that the region about Newark may be taken as t} T pical of the ter- 
rane named after that city. The characteristic reddish-brown 
sandstones and shales are there well exposed, and in the neighbor- 
*Am. Jour. Sci., 2d ser. 1856, Vol. 22, p. :(."»7: also in Am. Assoc. Adv 
Sci. Proc, Vol. 10, Albany meeting, 1856, p, 181. 
t Vol. 5, 1890; pp. 197-20:.'. 
