PROSSER. | The Upper Permian. 81 
amined at various points and for considerable distances, but with- 
out obtaining any traces of fossil remains, excepting some frag- 
ments of wood. . . . On our return from Texas, we stopped at 
Tucker, Oklahoma, near to the Cimarron river, and examined for a 
day the exposures and bad lands of the Upper Permian of that re- 
gion. Although the exposures are most favorable for the ex- 
hibition of any fossils which the strata may contain, nothing of 
organic origin was found. Crystallized gypsum is very abundant.”! 
In 1896 Professor Cragin published a detailed account of the Red- 
3eds, which he referred to the Permian system and subdivided into 
ten formations. The evidence upon which this correlation is based 
is apparently about the same as that of Professor Hay. The state- 
ment of Professor Cragin is as follows: “The Permian of the Kansas- 
Oklahoma basin undoubtedly has many similarities to that of 
Texas, but it is probably in only one or two of the terranes of the 
Upper Permian, especially in the Medicine Lodge gypsum, that 
Stratigraphic continuity or even parallelism of physico-geographic 
conditions can be traced between them. It therefore seems un- 
necessary to treat the Permian north and south of the Ouachita 
mountain system as belonging to two distinct basins, and profit- 
less to attempt divisional correlations between them.2 Professor 
Cragin’s table of formations for the Red beds is as follows: 
“The Cimarron Series. 
DIVISIONS. FORMATIONS. 
Big Basin sandstone. 
Hackberry shales. 
Kiger. Day Creek dolomite. 
Red Bluif sandstones. 
Dog Creek shales. 
Cave Creek gypsum. 
Flower-pot shales. 
Salt Fork. Cedar Hills sandstones. 
Salt Plain measures. 
Harper sandstones.’ 
tense: Cope, Proceedings Academy Natural Science, Philadelphia, 1894, pt. I., 
pp. 64, 0%. 
2 EF. W. Cragin, Colorado College Studies, vol. VI, pp. 2, 3. 
3 Wool, (> 8 
—6 
