HIGHLANDS    OF    NEW    JERSEY.  647 
eventually  accepted,  will  place  the  pre-Cambrian  rocks  of  the  High- 
lands of  New  Jersey  and  southeastern  New  York  in  the  same  light 
as  the  Grenville  rocks  of  the  original  Laurentian  region  and  the 
similar  formations  of  the  Adirondacks,  in  both  of  which  regions  the 
main  part  of  the  gneisses  of  determinable  origin  is  regarded  as 
intrusive  by  Smyth,  Adams,  and  others.  In  this  case  the  Algonkian 
or  Archean  age  for  New  Jersey  must  be  determined  upon  the  final 
correlation  of  the  white  crystalline  limestones  and  of  the  other  sedi- 
ments occurring  with  or  near  them  in  minor  amounts.  However,  as 
in  the  regions  mentioned  above,  failure  to  find  or  recognize  a  basal 
complex  upon  which  the  limestones  and  other  remnants  of  sedi- 
mentary rocks  were  deposited  can  not  be  accepted  as  evidence  that 
the  basement  is  not  somewhere  represented. 
NOTES. 
1  Geological  and  mineralogical  notice  of  a  portion  of  the  northeastern  part  of 
the  State  of  New  York,  by  Augustus  E.  Jessup.  Jour.  Philadelphia  Acad.  Sci., 
vol.  2,  1821,  pp.  185-191. 
2A  geological  and  agricultural  survey  of  the  district  adjoining  the  Erie  Canal, 
in  the  State  of  New  York,  by  Amos  Eaton.  Albany,  1824,  pp.  157,  with  a 
geological  profile. 
3  First  annual  report  of  the  second  geological  district  of  New  York,  by 
Ebenezer  Emmons.  First  Ann.  Itept.  Geol.  Survey  New  York,  1837,  pp.  97-150, 
and  a  map. 
4  First  annual  report  of  the  geological  survey  of  the  third  district  of  New 
York,  by  T.  A.  Conrad.     Idem,  pp.  155-186. 
5  Report  of  the  geologist  of  the  second  geological  district  of  New  York,  by 
Ebenezer  Emmons.  Second  Ann.  Kept.  Geol.  Survey  New  York,  1838,  pp  185- 
250,  with  a  map. 
8  Second  annual  report  of  so  much  of  the  geological  survey  of  the  third  district 
of  New  York  as  relates  to  objects  of  immediate  utility,  by  Lardner  Vanuxem, 
Idem,  pp.  253-286. 
7  Third  annual  report  of  the  survey  of  the  second  geological  district,  by 
Ebenezer  Emmons.     Third  Ann.  Kept.  Geol.  Survey  New  York,  1839,  pp.  201-239. 
8  Fourth  annual  report  of  the  survey  of  the  second  geological  district,  by 
Ebenezer  Emmons.  Fourth  Ann.  Kept.  Geol.  Survey  New  York,  1840,  pp.  259- 
353. 
9  Fourth  annual  report  of  the  geological  survey  of  the  third  district,  by 
Lardner  Vanuxem.     Idem,  pp.  355-383. 
10  Fifth  annual  report  of  the  geological  survey  of  the  first  geological  district, 
by  YV.  YV.  Mather.     Fifth  Ann.  Kept.  Geol.  Survey  New  York,  1841,  pp.  63-112. 
"  Fifth  annual  report  of  the  survey  of  the  second  geological  district,  by 
Ebenezer  Emmons.     Idem,  pp.  113-136. 
"Geology  of  New  York  (northern  district),  by  Ebenezer  Emmons.  Albany, 
1842,  pp.  438,  17  plates. 
13  Geology  of  New  York,  part  3  (central  district),  by  Lardner  Vanuxem. 
Albany,  1842,  pp.  307. 
"Geological  sketch  of  the  neighborhood  of  Rossie,  by  Thomas  Macfarlane. 
Canadian  Naturalist,  2d  ser.,  vol.  2,  1865,  pp.  267-275. 
