152 PROCEEDINGS: BOSTON SOCIETY NATURAL HISTORY. 
In the November number of the American geologist, 1893, vol. 12, 
p. 309-314, Messrs. Dumble and Cummins describe an interesting 
section under the title, The Kent section and G-ryphaea Tucum- 
carii Marcou. At the base of what they call the Washita Divi¬ 
sion there is a group of strata marked No. 5, subdivided into three 
parts, 5 a, 55, and 5c, the last being the oldest. In the middle sub¬ 
division, 55, four feet in thickness, they found the following fossils : 
Ammonites ( Schloenbachici ) leonensis Conr., Ammonites peruvi¬ 
ana von Bucli, Gryphaea Pitcheri Mort., Gryphaea dilatata var. 
Tucumcarii Marcou, Cyprineria crassa Meek, Ostrea subovata? 
Shmnard, Pecten texanus Rom., Terebratula ivacoensis Rom., 
Triyonia Emory i Conrad, Epiaster sp. ind., Turritella seriatim- 
granula Romer, Turritella Marnochi White, Cardium multistri¬ 
atum Conrad ; and in the subdivision, 5c, the lowest bed, they found 
Pecten texanus Rom., Ammonites leonensis Conrad, Pima ivacoensis 
Rom., Gryphaea Pitclieri Mort. 
Mr. Dumble had the kindness to send me two small boxes of some 
of the fossils he collected in subdivisions 55 and 5c, together with a 
sketch of the country round Kent and two sections. I may state 
that the two sections are separate; one, which is described as 
belonging exclusively to the Washita Division, does not overlie the 
other which is described as of the Fredericksburg Division. They 
are at some distance from one another, and the Washita section lies 
upon beds not exposed to view, detritus and drift materials covering 
the base of the section. But Mr. Dumble regards the base as formed 
by Paluxy sands? (the mark of interrogation is his). In the Fred¬ 
ericksburg section, lying in apparent discordance of stratification on 
the Palaxy sands, we have only forty-four feet of strata referred by 
Mr. Dumble to the Texana beds and Comanche Peak limestone. 
The conclusion of Messrs. Dumble and Cummins is: “ Since, there¬ 
fore, in the Kent section we have Prof. Marcou’s G. dilatata var. 
Tucumcarii in the same bed with such typical Cretaceous forms as 
G. Pitclieri , Ammonites leonensis , A.peruvianas, Terebratula ivaco¬ 
ensis , etc., it must be considered a true Cretaceous form. Its dis¬ 
covery in this connection simply adds one more to the list of fossils 
occurring in the Washita division of the Cretaceous of Trans Pecos 
Texas, whose close resemblance to well-known Jurassic types would, 
under any less conclusive evidence of its Cretaceous age, warrant its 
reference to the Jurassic.” 
The conclusions of Messrs. Dumble and Cummins are based on 
