THE AECHEAN. 149 
k 
lane prefers 'time' to correspond with 'series' instead of epoch/ 
as preferred by the International Committee. Irving and Dutton 
are unwilling to endorse any system of nomenclature for divi- 
sions below the third. 
7. To the International Committee's use of ' rocks/ ' zone/ and 
'horizon/ Walcott does not object. Dutton objects. Irving's 
objection as below division 3 holds. 
8. To the restriction of ' depot ' to a mass produced during a 
limited time or space and characterized by petrographical homo- 
geneity, Dutton assents. 
9. To the application of univocal names to units of the first 
order and homophonous terminations to the different orders of 
units, Dutton and G. M. Dawson object. In the latter subject 
Irving objects particularly to the termination ' ic' Emmons, 
Walcott and Gilbert object to the entire proposition regarding 
homophony, the latter because it would " render it impossible to 
name a stratigraphic division without declaring its taxonomic 
rank. It W'Ould infringe the right of reserving opinions." 
10. To the exclusion of names taken from petrography such as 
the division 'chalk,' etc. Dutton agrees and Walcott objects. 
11. Walcott objects to the restriction of a name of a place 
from serving units of two orders, i.e., portlandic series, and 
Portland ian stage, etc. 
12. Dutton proposes six grand divisions of the geological scale. 
a, Archean ; b, an intermediate division to be named ; o, Paleo- 
zoic ; d, Mesozoic ; e, Cenozoic ; /, Quaternary. , 
13. To the division of the Cretaceous system, the disposition 
of ' flysch/ and that of the ' rhaetic,' Prof. Irving objects that 
none of these divisions are applicable in American Geology. 
14. He dissents, as does A. Winchell, from the division of 
the now abandoned Crystallophyllian (Archean) group into, 1, 
Gneiss and Protogine; 2, Crystalline Schists; 3, Phyllites.* 
15. Irving and Walcott express a preference for the term 
Archean, as already mentioned by them, for the lower division of 
rocks. 
16. Mr. Gilbert objects to the provisional scheme of colors 
proposed for the European map ; 1st, that it is not suited to the 
making of detail maps; and 2d, as a universal scale its great de- 
fect is that it makes no provision for the indication of strati- 
* All this was rejected or postponed by the last Congress, 
