•96 The Waverly Group in Ohio — Herrick. 
species supposed to be new to science have been collected, of 
which 80 species or more are described by the writer while 
about 25 new species of bryozoa are described by Mr. E. 0. 
Ulrich, whose kind services are worthy of special notice. But 
the portion of the study which has chiefly occupied and in¬ 
terested us has been the discrimination of separate and relatively 
distinct horizons and the effort to discover the historical in¬ 
terpretation which their relations warrant. The present pur¬ 
pose is to indicate in outline the conclusions to which the study 
has led. They are briefly these: 
First, that the Waverly has no autonomous existence, but is 
a term of purely geographical value. The series of strata 
grouped under this head are to be distributed in all the sub¬ 
divisions of American stratigraphy between the Hamilton on 
one hand and the St. Louis on the other. 
Second, the prevailing character of the fossils in the upper,, 
middle, and lower portions, respectively, permits their reference 
in a general way, to the age of the Sub-carboniferous limestones 
(Burlington and Keokuk), the Kinderhook, and a transitional 
zone partaking of upper Chemung characters with out being its 
specific representative. That the middle portion is equivalent 
to the Kinderhook admits, in view of known facts, not the 
slightest doubt, yet we hesitate to make the specific correlation 
suggested by Prof. Winchell between the Kinderhook and 
Catskill, believing the latter an extreme and one-sided local 
factor in a series itself aside from the normal or generalized 
progression in time. That the Catskill is in some sense repre¬ 
sentative of the Kinderhook we readily admit. 
The middle Waverly or Kinderhook has been strangely over¬ 
looked by Prof. Newberry and others who have based their 
opinion on the succession of strata called Cuygahoga shale... 
The recent study abundantly shows that in north-eastern Ohio 
the typical middle Waverly (that which has often been un¬ 
happily termed Waverly* conglomerate) is entirely absent, but 
fossiliferous horizons, which in central Ohio are separated by 
over TOO feet of the most prolific rock, are in the Cuyahoga^ 
valley in juxtaposition. 
Third, the Bedford shale forms no part of the groups above 
discussed. Its fossils which, contrary to the previous state¬ 
ments, are numerous and well-preserved in favorable localities. 
