Faunal Aspects of the Original Kinderhook. — Keyes. 32 1 
clearly to indicate, and not the base of the Louisiana lime- 
stone, then there is perfect agreement in Weller's conclusions 
regarding the most notable faunal change in the Burlington 
section and my own in the Louisiana section taking place at 
the same horizon. 
In regard to the lithological character of the Productal lime- 
stone at Burlington being the same as those of the Louisiana 
limestone the real resemblance is certainly very remote. Few- 
would ascribe lithographic properties to it as in the case of the. 
Louisiana stone. While at Burlington it is the only bed the 
general appearance of which at all approaches the Lithographic 
or Louisiana limestone there is not very much to suggest 
identity. If the two limestones are one and the same there 
must be very remarkable and wholly anomalous stratigraphi- 
cal phenomena existing between the cities of Keokuk and 
Burlington. 
There is one feature in which Mr. Weller's recent work 
corroberates my own results in a most conclusive manner. 
Kinderhook as a geological title is no^ longer available and 
valid. 
If the Chonopectus sandstone immediately beneath the 
Productal or Fragmental limestone at Burlington is pre-Louis- 
ianan in age, as Weller suggests, it is ascribing an age much 
older than is even intimated in any of the recent Missouri and 
Iowa reports. 
In this connection certain recent records of deep wells are 
not without interest, in attempting to parallel the Burlington 
section with that of Kinderhook and Louisiana.* The evi- 
dence derived indicates that the lowermost member of the typ- 
ical Kinderhook, the Louisiana limestone, which is 60 feet 
thick at the type locality, gets thinner and thinner northward 
until at Keokuk it is not more than 10 feet thick, and doubtless 
fades out altogether before Burlington is reached. On the 
other hand the median member of the Kinderhook, the Hanni- 
l)al shale which is 70 feet thick at the type locality retains its 
full thickness at least as far north as Keokuk, and at Burling- 
ton appears to merge downward with the shale which farther 
south underlies the Louisiana limestone. 
The latest faunal correlation appears to be closely in agree- 
ment with this stratigraphical interpretation. 
*J<)virnal Geoloj'y, Vol. VIII, p. 317, i()00. 
