72 The laconic — Marcou. 
group of Logan. He thought that the dozen, or at most twenty 
odd identified species of the Champlain system, were not enough 
to sustain such divisions and sure recognition of groups, and he 
preferred to put all pell-mell in a single big lump or great heap, 
which he called Calciferous-Chazy-Trenton, an "off-shore 
deposit" according to his phraseology. He has however made 
a single exception for Whitehall, where he gives a section in 
which he signalizes the Calciferous, the so-called Chazy with a 
band of shales between, then the so-called Trenton with a 
second band of shales, and above his so-called Hudson group 
(no Utica slate); "the strata of the entire section are conform- 
able; and the limestones were identified by contained fossils" 
i^Loc, cit. p. 318). But no name of a single fossil is given, and 
Mr. Walcott does not state whether the shales are fossilferous, 
or whether he found fossils in his so-called Hudson group — a 
singular neglect on his part, for Messrs. Dana and Wing have 
not described Whitehall. 
Resume — The fact that such an expert in finding fossils and 
in palaeontologic work as Mr. Walcott is, has hesitated to de- 
termine the age of the groups of strata contained in his Calcif- 
erous-Chazy-Trenton, twice as thick as the Champlain system, 
and lithologically different, shows plainly that it was too much 
for him, even with the help of his overlapping fault and other 
faults so easily and freely used since Logan discovered them 
in his Montreal office on the new year's eve of 1861. Mr. 
Walcott has failed to show palieontological, stratigraphical and 
lithological evidences that his No. 3 is the homotaxis of the 
Calciferous, Chazy, Birdseye, Black River and Trenton forma- 
tions, of the same region, which are so beautifully developed 
and typical close by, in the same basin at Trenton Falls, Chazy, 
and many other localities of the state of New York. The few 
fossils, all ill preserved, not one described, and also not repre- 
sented by good figures, are all of doubtful value, not only for 
their identification, which is far from proved, but also as char- 
acteristic fossil species {^Leitniuscheln in German). 
The Taconic Slates are not identified with the 
Utica Slates of Dudley observatory. — The No 4 re- 
ferred by Mr. Walcott to the Hudson River group (Lorraine 
shales,) is given without its thickness, and without palaeonto- 
