The Loess and the Laming Man. — Shimek. 357 
greater number of truly terrestrial and upland species is made 
subordinate ! 
The writer thus refers to these details at some length to 
show that the supposed information upon which these eminent 
authors based their conclusions, at least in large part, was er- 
roneous, and that consequently the conclusions themselves can- 
not be entirely correct. Mere reference to these conclusions, 
therefore, does not settle the case. Both the great works cited 
represent the results of pioneer efforts, and were not primarily 
concerned with the origin of loess, that question being largely • 
incidental. With this prop removed there remains nothing but 
generalities for the support of the recent revival of the glacio- 
fluviatile theory. 
In this connection the writer desires to refer at some length 
to certain statements made by professor Winchell* concerning 
the Unio which was found in the Lansing deposit. In order 
that there may be no misunderstanding concerning these state- 
ments they are here reproduced in full : 
"In case the Unio were a true fossil, it would be. of itself, 
sufficient proof of the subaqueous deposition of the materials 
in which it lay. Land shells may form fossils in aqueous de- 
posits, but never water shells in land deposits. It is, a priori, 
however, the strongest evidence of sub-aqueous origin of the 
loess in which it was found,. .. .and the agreement which it 
has with obvious other features of the deposit serves to accum- 
ulate such a weight of testimony in the same direction that it 
requires the greatest hardihood to attempt to explain it on the 
hvpothesis of land origin of the deposit." 
The same author had previously f made the following state- 
ment: 
"Many land forms may exist in an aquatic formation but 
the existence of a single aquatic fossil species in the loess re- 
quires the presence of water. Many have been identified by 
good authorities." 
In the face of the foregoing statements it may be an exhibi- 
tion of greatest hardihood to venture to still maintain the 
ground that the loess is of land origin, and that as evidence of 
the sub-aqueous origin of the loess the Lansing Unio i^ worth- 
*Am. Geol., vol. xxxi. p. 282. 
iBull. Qeol. ffoc. of Lot., vol. 14, p. 145, Apr., 1 !><>:;. 
