scattered over the margin of the inland ice, and which is inclt)sed in the 
layers of the decaying ice front, out against the moraine, but leaves in 
the ice the other material which is not fine enough to pass away as clay 
mud. In this way the loess, as well as the clearly similar mud products 
of Greenland, receive an entirely satisfactory explanation." 
After remarking upon the diminished importance of interglacial for- 
est beds since Prof. Russell's discoveries in Alaska, and upon their oc- 
currence chiefly in the marginal area, Dr. Hoist says that "if in reality 
the glacier which once covered almost half of North America could 
have entirely melted away, permitting an interglacial epoch many times 
longer than the postglacial, when the country was free from ice as now, 
vegetation and soil ought, at least to as large an extent as now, to have 
taken possession oi the surface; and when an ice-sheet a second time 
moved forward to the former boundai-y line, it ought to have buried, 
and in numerous cases to have eroded, but not to have wholly removed, 
the interglacial layers. We should, therefore, now find in innumerable 
places under the later moraines vegetation and interglacial soil; and, fur- 
ther, we ought to find in the morainic drift, fragments of bones, shells, 
wood, and other organic remains almost without number, and finally in 
some places one ought to come upon outside layers of interglacial age. 
But, except in the marginal part of the drift are;i, one finds nothing of 
all this." 
Dr. Hoist further renuirks upon the difficulty encountered in the at- 
tempts to correlate the glacial and interglacial epochs of Europe and 
America. "The same yellow and blue moraines which in Scandinavia 
and northern German}' are supposed to represent two ice ages are also 
found in North America. I have seen them myself in Ohio, bvit there 
they.ai-e wholly attributed to the later ice age. . . .The loess, which in 
Europe Ijelongs to the second ice age, in America is supposed to belong 
to the first,'" etc. 
In conclusion the distinguished Swedish authoi- expresses it ;i.s his 
oijinion that there can not be the strong cumulative force in the argu- 
ments brought forward by the multi-glacialists which has been attril)- 
uted to them, since each argument, when weighed separately, is insuffi- 
cient. He affirms that, during his wide travels in the investigation of 
the facts in question, he finds nowhere any decisiveproof of the hypoth- 
esis of an interglacial epoch. Nowhere in foreign countries is tmy fact 
met that can be considered to make it unlikely that in Sw(>den thci-e 
was only one ice age. G. Fukdrrkk WRicur. 
Ohrrliti, Ohio, Nor. i:>1li, ls:r>. 
