In legal matters, cases are re-opened when new evidence is forth‐coming, with the implied assumption that no case should be regarded as settled until it is settled right. In scientific affairs such a procedure is even more important because an error not soon corrected may eventually result in a mass of misinformation due to its inclusion in text-books and other books of reference. In geology, where no one is able personally to investigate more than a few of the localities described in the voluminous literature and much of our work must be built on the published investigations of previous workers, it is highly important to re-open cases, supposedly settled, whenever any new evidence appears or new interpretations are suggested.
With this principle in mind, the author brings to the attention of his fellow geologists matters that seem to him to call for the reconsideration of some phases of the . . .