2<4 The American Geologist. Aprii,i894 
ity in the flow, as it was always quite active when allowed 
free vent. 
Three hundred feet west of the well and at the base of the 
mound, in digging a pond to supply water for the pumps, the 
same liquid, sandy mud was found at a depth of eighteen feet, 
or about the same level as the stratum in the well. In the bot- 
tom of this pond there were many soft spots showing a brown, 
oleaginous mud. and throughout the digging numerous gas 
vents were seen, all of which were beautifully lined with thin 
coatings of sulphur, while several small lumps of sulphur oc- 
curred scattered through the cla} T ey sand. Whether these 
were derived from old gas vents or not, could not be ascer- 
tained. 
The main peculiarity about this mound is that it rises like 
an isolated hill of sand from a level sea of cla}\ It is every- 
where surrounded b} T level (or approximately so) beds of dark 
blue clay, all more or less calcareous, and some of it extremely 
so, with thin deposits of sand interstratified here and there 
and from which good, clear, fresh water is obtainable almost 
artywhere al depths not exceeding twenty feet. The top of 
the mound covers an area of probably fifty acres and is 
-lightly porous. Small, irregularly shaped depressions occur 
in several places, from the bottoms of which considerable 
quantities of gas are always escaping. 
The occurrence of this liquid mud with its attendant gas 
• Iocs not appear to he singular within the coastal country, al- 
though none, so far as I know, has previously been recorded 
from any portion of the Texas area. In the artesian well at 
New Orleans, bored in 1N54. No. 5 of the section is recorded 
as "a dark semi-fluid clay, nearly destitute of gribtiness."* 
This occurs at a depth of 31 feet, and it also appears from Dr. 
Hilgard's report that the same liquid mud occurs everywhere 
beneath that city at depths varying from 37 to 56 feet.-f depths 
which correspond very closely with that in the Beaumont well. 
Regarding the origin of this and the several other mounds 
of similar structure within the county the question may lie 
asked. Are they gigantic mudlumps having a similar forma- 
*See section in Physics and Hydraulics of the Miss. River, 1861, p. 101. 
tGeology of the Delta and Mudlumps of the Mississippi River, Am. 
Jour. Sci., Ill, vol. i, pp. 241-246, 356-368, April and May, 1871. 
