334 The American Geologist. June, 1902. 
er Huronian schists, from point to point for hundreds of miles 
on each side of the Animikie region and within a few miles 
of the Animikie strata themselves, and we find the steeply 
tilted Lower Huronian schist, with which the Upper Huron- 
ian everywhere else is sharply folded, underlying the level, 
undisturbed Animikie sediments. How much probability is 
there that this particular part of the Upper Huronian should 
have escaped the fate of all the rest and remained flat and 
unaffected when undoubted Upper Huronian rocks were nipped 
into close folds and changed into thoroughgoing schists, with- 
in a few miles to the north, and almost everywhere else 
throughout the whole province. 
The Animikie rocks are entirely different lithologically 
from those of any part of the Upper Huronian, consisting 
of shaly slates, cherts and dolomytes instead of schist con- 
glomerates and quartzytes; they are almost unchanged sedi- 
ments, while the Upper Huronian is everywhere more or less 
recrystallized and schistose; they are lying unconformably on 
the upturned edges of the Lower Huronian schists, while the 
Upper Huronian wherever associated with the Lower Huroni- 
an is parallel with it and caught in the same set of folds. Why 
should two such entirely different series of rocks be confound- 
ed under the same name? 
Professor Van Hise has naturally followed the lead of 
his senior in the region where both have done so much vyal- 
uable work; but he has shown that the logic of facts opposes 
part of Irving’s theories in his classification of the Vermil- 
ion series as Archaen instead of Animikie; and we may hope 
that he will not continue to support Irving’s other erroneous 
view concerning the equivalence of the Animikie with the 
original or Upper Huronian when he studies the facts in the 
field. 
It is a little astonishing that Irving should have seen fit 
to put his own view of the Animikie, arrived at after what 
seems to have been a very hurried and imperfect study, against 
the matured opinions of Logan and all the other geologists 
who worked in the region; and we may hope that the con- 
fusion of terms between the northern and southern geologists 
which his mistake has brought into Pre-cambrian geology 
will soon be set right, now that the two schools of geolo- 
gists have met on the same ground. 
