122 Correspondence. 
Laurentian and Lower Silurian.^ In the former instance the absence 
of all the intervening formations could only be accounted for by Mr. 
Murray by assuming a gigantic break extending right through the 
island and bringing the Carboniferous down against the Laurentian, 
burying the immense thickness of underlying rocks in the gulf of St. 
Lawrence. In 1873-74, I was sent to survey this section of country and 
examine it closely. I entirely failed to find the least indication of his 
great fault anywhere in the region. There was no getting over the 
fact that it did not exist, and that the Carboniferous rested unconfor- 
mably both on the Laurentian and Silurian without any such fault in- 
tervening. He was convinced of the correctness of my observations 
and thenceforth removed the line indicating this great break from his 
maps. 
Another observation of yours has also long been held by me, viz. — 
that there is a great deal more in lithological resemblances than is 
generally conceded. I always maintained this against Mr. Murray, 
who never placed much reliance upon it. Of course I do not maintain 
that it h»lds good in every case, or that the lithological characteris- 
tics of a certain series of rocks in one country can be always taken as 
a guide to the same series in another. But there are certain well- 
marked characteristics in almost every formation which become famil- 
iar to one who has for a long time closely observed them, which al- 
ways act as a guide to him, at all events in other sections of the same 
country. At least I have found it so here. There can be no question 
that stratigraphy should be more relied upon than it generally is. 
There are many instances where theory and even palaeontology have 
had to give way. That reference to Mr. Walcott's recent visit to this 
country, in your pamphlet is one. It is a great satisfaction to me learn 
this, for although Mr. Murray commenced the study of those primor- 
dial rocks, it was I who really worked them out, visited every locality 
where they outcropped and constructed the column representing the 
order of succession oi the various strata. I do not maintain that it is 
absolutely correct in every particular. It would take very much more 
time than I was allowed to devote to the work to perfect it, and there is 
nothing that would give me greater pleasure now, than to do so, but un- 
fortunately I am so situated here, where purely scientific work of that 
kind is so little understood or appreciated, that I dare not devote a 
season to it. It is from your pamphlet that I learned for the first time 
that Mr. Walcott has found our stratigraphy to be correct. You are 
quite right in placing the Topsail Head and Brj-er's Head limestones 
beneath the Paradoxides beds of St. Mary's and Trinity bays. It is 
^ The names Lower Silurian and Silurian are used for the upper and 
even the middle Taconic. The Potsdam of Great Bell Island of Bill- 
ings does not belong to the Potsdam of New York, which does not ex- 
ist in Newfoundland, but seems to occupy the upper part of the col- 
umn of Primordial strata in the southeastern part of Newfoundland, 
and is very likely the homotaxis of a part of point Levis and Phillips- 
burgh groups. — J. M. 
