21ie Second hal-c AUjoikju!)!. — Taiilov. 119 
W\ (,'bi-icl<ie (SpeiiciT) 55 ? 
Clarksburg- (SpenciT) 45 ? 
The node line passes a little south of Butt'alo and a little 
north of Duliith. Near the center of the map its direction is 
N. 63*^ W. and the direction of maximum rise of the deformed 
plane at right angles to this is therefore about N. 27" E. But 
at the sides the meridians converge slightly northward. This 
agrees closely with the direction of the conjectural isobases 
for the region of Georgian bay as shown in I)e Geer's map of 
recent changes of level in Eastern North America.* Lake Su- 
perior is 20 feet higher than lake Michigan, and the node of 
the Nipissing plane should therefore l)e on a line about ten 
miles south of the isobase BB. This node is shown by the 
short line FF which passes through the outer Apostle islands 
and strikes the north shore at Beaver Bay. In his article on 
the Algonquin beach, Dr. Spencer sa3'S that Minnesota point 
at Duluth shows that the water there has been backed up to 
a higher level recentl3^f This view is undoubtedly correct, 
and the opinion expressed b}^ me in discussing this feature in 
the fourth paper of the above list needs tf) be modified ac(rord- 
ingly. The long Chaqiuunegon point near Asldand. Wiscon- 
sin, is another recent littoral bar of the same kind, and it is 
curious to note that botii of these lie on the south side of the 
calculated nodal line of the Nipissingand Superior planes and 
that there are no other great littoral bars like them on the 
shores of this lake. This correction points to the conclusion 
that the Nipissing plane rises from Duluth to North Bay 
about 165 feet, instead of 125 or 130 as stated in the fourth 
paper. The isobase DD crosses Isle Royale and strikes tlie 
north coast of lake Superior about at Portage river. Isle Roy- 
ale has many shore lakes like Lac la Belle, cut otf by littoral 
bars. There is good reason to believe that the Nipissing beacli 
is in its normal place on the north shore, as indicated by the 
projection of its plane from the southeast. And if it is there 
we cannot avoid tlie conclusion that the change which de- 
formed it also carried all the other higher beaches up with it. 
Yet professor Lawson, as pointed out in the latter part of the 
fourth paper, infers that there has been no deformation of the 
*()p. cit. 
|"I>cr<irinati()ii (if tin- Alir<iii(|iiiri I'cacli," <'tc.. piiixt' 1!>. 
