294 ' The American Geologist. November, 1902 
A body of water sufficient to cover this ridge would form an 
inland sea, with land on which the molluscs might develop so 
remote from present Natchez hill that it would have been nec- 
essary to transport them a great distance by water. That it is 
extremely improbable that the shells of the loess at any point 
have been transported any considerable distance by water has 
already been shown by the writer.* That those of Natchez have 
not been so carried seems to be established beyond a doubt by 
the following facts : 
1. At Natchez several shells of HeUcina orhiciilata were 
found with the operculum lying within the aperture, a posi- 
tion ^Yhich it could not occupy if the shell-bearing animal had 
been deposited in water, for it becomes detached immediately 
after decay has set in, and would be carried away. Modern up- 
land dead specimens are frequently found with the operculum 
lying within the shell. 
2. The extremely delicate shells of snails' eggs are pre- 
served in the loess. They are so frail that they would scarcely 
stand transportation by water. 
3. The larger perfect fossil snails uniformly have the 
spire of the shell empty, no clay having been carried into the 
shell be^•ond the body-whorl, as would have been the case in 
drifting and finally submersed shells. 
4. The fact that the local fossil and modern faunas are 
very similar has already been emphasized, and further indi- 
cates that transportation of shells from a distance has not taken 
place. 
5. There are no traces of beaches, shore-lines, etc., such 
as would be left by a large body of water such as this theory 
postulates, nor does the remarkable homogeneity of the de- 
posit taken together with its distribution suggest the possi- 
bility of deposition in flooded streams. 
That the Natchez loess was not deposited by glaciers or 
icel:)ergs is, if possible, even more evident. Natchez lies far 
south of the limits of glaciation, hence floating icebergs only 
need to be considered. Icebergs, however, would require a 
great body of water to float them over Natchez hill, and the 
objections to this have already been considered. Moreover, the 
fossils of the Natchez loess are, as shown herein, in large part 
*Pioc. la. Acad. Scl., vol. V. pp. 40-41. -1S98. 
