3 1 8 The A mncan Geologist. November, i90o 
cently to a special inquiry* as to the actual stratigraphic range 
of the fossils of the Kinderhook in the neignborhood of the 
typical locality. It was an inquiry ns to what the original Kin- 
derhook rocks had to say for themselves regarding the faunas 
they carired, independently of those of any other section, and 
irrespective of any ascribed geological age. The inferences 
drawn from this investigation were: 
(i). Faunally, the typical Kinderhook formation could not 
be regarded as a geological unit in the modern stratigraphical 
sense of the term. 
(2). It contained two quite distinct general faunas, which 
are not genetically related; a lower one which reached to the 
top of the Hannibal shales, and an upper one, which nowhere 
went below the same horizon. 
(3). The main part of the typical section was closely re- 
lated faunally to the beds beneath; the upper part, to those 
above. 
(4). If to-day we were to classify anew the typical Kinder- 
hook and associated beds we would unite the upper beds, re- 
garded as the equivalent of the Chouteau, with the Burlington. 
Whether the lower fauna of the typical Kinderhook is to 
be regarded as a Devonian, one or not, matters little in the pres- 
ent connection. That it is, as a whole, not related to the upper 
fauna is certain. That it is related, and related closely and 
genetically, to still lower faunas which it has been customary to 
regard as Devonian is equally certain. If these faunas under 
the typical Kinderhook are not Devonian, then there is surely 
no Devonian fauna represented at the type locality of the Kin- 
derhook, and at Louisiana. 
In the case of the Burlington section, 125 miles north of 
Louisiana, the conditions are somewhat complicated. There 
exist factors which have no representation farther south, and 
which are, at first, likely to confuse one in attempting to par- 
allel the two sections. Among other things, these peculiarities 
at the northern locality have led Worthen, White, and very 
recently Weller, to believe that the Fragmental, or Productal 
limestone, 15 feet beneath the base of the Burlington lime- 
stone, is the northward extension of the Louisiana limestone. 
Concerning this opinion the recent statements of Wellerf 
*Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci., Vol. IV, pp. 26-49, 1897. 
tTrans. Acad. Sci., St. Louis, Vol. X, p. 124. 1900. 
