230 J[fit^ American Geologist. April, isis 
mentioned, but this is enough to show that such a precedent has been 
established." 
Attention is failed at this time to the central point in the 
note for several reasons: (i) There are inadvertently intro- 
duced into this short paragraph seven mis-statements of fact, 
five misrepresentations of published opinions on the subject, 
and no less than four other deceptive factors, all of which, if 
allowed to pass unnoticed, will have a tendency to perpetuate 
"some confusion in the nomenclature of the Mississippian for- 
mations"; (2) to avoid, if possible, further expression of erron- 
eous statements which have been already several times repeat- 
ed; and (3) to present more clearly, than has been perhaps here- 
tofore done, the exact meaning of the term in question as un- 
derstood in its original definition. 
In the first place the proposal of the term Augusta for one 
of the main subdivisions of the Mississippian series was not with 
the intention, as implied in the paragraph just quoted, of en- 
larging the already burdensome synonymy that was known to 
exist in the nomenclature of the geological formations of the 
continental interior. In direct opposition it was an attempt 
to find a name that would not only be appropriate, but that 
would meet all the requirements of a recognized definition of 
a geological formation. None existed at the time for the sub- 
division defined, though the title Osage, as originally pro- 
posed, had been evidently intended to occupy a somewhat 
similar position — not identical as is shown farther on. The 
latter name possibly might have been extended so as to cover 
all the formations included by the other term had it been 
found otherwise suitable. Inasmuch as Osage, after careful 
investigation, did not prove to be adaptable it was thought 
best to suggest a term that would obviate entirely all the ob- 
jections that stood so conspicuously against the other. 
Previous to the time of the formal proposal to unite the 
Burlington and Keokuk limestones under a single title, the 
strata of the Mississippi basin that were regarded as making 
up the lower Carboniferous series were commonly grouped 
under six principal heads, viz: (i) Kinderhook, (2) Burling- 
ton, (3) Keokuk. (4) Warsaw, (5) St. Louis, and (6) Chester 
or Kaskaskia. These were the names which were used almost 
invariably to designate the formations. Each was made up of 
