LOWER PALEOZOIC. 203 
an examination of the early original documents. This paper is 
too voluminous to incorporate into this report, and I can only 
give a brief summary of it. He reviews the original proposal 
and fundamental idea of the founder of the system, in point of 
definition, stratigraphic position, geographic distribution, consti- 
tution, reasons for existence, lithologic distinctness, stratigraphic 
unconformities and paleontologic characters. This idea he finds 
to be borne out in the existence of a real sub-Silurian system both 
in Europe and America, the fundamental ideas of Murchison and 
of Sedgwick not at all colliding with that of Emmons, the only 
real conflict being between Messrs. Murchison and Sedgwick in 
England, as to who should occupy and name what he styles the 
"Silurian Annex" — the Bala group of rocks. He next com- 
pares the Taconic with the Huronian and with the primordial 
zone of Barrande. These two ideas collide with the Taconic, one 
structurally and the other faunally, but they are both of later 
date and have to give way on that ground. He then states the 
position and equivalences of the Taconic system, quoting the re- 
cent results of Messrs. "VValcott and Ford, and the opinions of 
Mr. Marcou, of Cambridge, and M. Dewalque, the General Sec- 
retary of the Committee on Nomenclature of the last Congress, 
and concludes with the following brief tabulation, which he 
favors : 
III. Silurian [= Upper Silurian, containing the 3d fauna]. 
II. Cambrian [::= Ordovician, containing the 2d fauna]. 
I. Taconic [Containing the primordial fauna]. 
From Dr. J. S. Newberry. 
The following communication from Dr. J. S. Newberry, of 
New York, embodies his recommendations on Paleozoic nomen- 
clature. 
Columbia College, New York, February 17tli, 1888. 
Prof. N. H. Winchell : 
My Dear Sir: I have to-day received your letter with the 
accompanying (preliminary) report, which I have read with 
much interest, and return to you. I agree with you fully that it 
is very desirable that Emmons' discovery of fossiliferous strata 
below the Potsdam should be, if possible, recognized in our geo- 
logical nomenclature. It is true that he made many mistakes, 
and his Taconic system, as he defined it, cannot be accepted. He 
