The Cuyahoga Shale and the Problem of the Ohio Waverly
Introduction It is not my purpose to enter into a discussion of the opinions which have from time to time been advanced with reference to the age and homologies of the so-called Waverly formation of Ohio. This has been done in extenso by A. Winchell* and by Newberry and Orton in the various reports of the Ohio Geological Survey. Neither is it necessary to repeat in detail the reasons for regarding the Waverly as a highly composite (and hence unnatural) rather than a simple element in the series, for it is hoped that the paleontological and stratigraphical evidence presented in the papers published in the Bulletin of Denison University, the American Geologist and elsewhere by the writer and his associates during the last few years may serve to sufficiently demonstrate this. The study has been so prolonged and minute that its results may be relied upon to justify the statement, . . .