It is true that continental altitudes and attitudes might change during a single epoch of glaciation. If the change thus brought about resulted in increased slope, the more sluggish drainage of the earlier part of the epoch would be gradually transformed into the more vigorous drainage of the later part. In this case, if the evidence of both the earlier sluggish drainage and of the later vigorous drainage remain, there should also remain the evidence of the intermediate stages. If the deposits representing the intermediate condition of drainage do not exist, while those representing both extremes do, there would be the best of reason for believing that the intermediate phases of drainage did not exist during a glacial epoch, but during an interglacial epoch, when streams were not handling glacial debris, and when they were eroding rather than depositing. The deposits of the slow and of the swift drainage might occur in such relations as to prove, beyond peradventure, that intermediate stages of glacial drainage never existed.

If the sluggish drainage accompanied the maximum ice invasion, while the vigorous accompanied a lesser, the evidence of the swift streams might be found far north of the southern limit of the earlier drift. The farther north of the outer border of the older drift the gravel representing the vigorous drainage of the later and minor ice-sheet occurs, the further the ice must have retreated before the change from the one type of drainage to the other was effected. On the other hand, the farther north of the limit of the later ice advance the sluggish drainage accompanying the earlier ice-sheet may be traced, the farther must the ice have receded before the changes resulting in vigorous drainage occurred. Under certain relations, the retreat of the ice might be shown to have been great enough, before the orographic movements which altered the nature of the drainage, to constitute in our judgment, a re-advance a distinct ice epoch. If for example throughout the course of a long river whose basin was largely covered with ice, there be evidence that sluggish drainage obtained during the maximum ice advance, and during all stages of the ice retreat until the basin was free from ice, and if there be evidence of a vigorous glacial drainage in the same valley at a later time, with no gradations between the two types, we have proof positive of at least a great recession, and of a considerable elevation of the land after the ice had receded beyond the limits of the drainage basin and before it again reached it in its re-advance. We hold that these phases of glacial drainage deposits may be so related to each other, to the valleys in which they occur, and to more or less distinct bodies of glacier drift, as to prove so great a recession of ice between the diverse phases of drainage deposition, as to constitute the second advance a distinct ice epoch.

The absence of evidence that the land stood at different elevations during different parts of the period of drift deposition, does not in any way militate against the theory of recurrent and distinct ice epochs. A constant attitude of the land is the thing to be assumed, until positive evidence to the contrary is adduced.

(12) Vigor and Sluggishness of Ice Action. If it can be shown that during one epoch of glaciation, we will say the epoch of maximum ice extension, the ice action was relatively sluggish, while during a later and minor advance its action was vigorous, the difference of action might be regarded as presumptive evidence of distinct ice epochs. Evidence of the two phases of ice action here referred to are difficult of definition, but they have been independently noted by more than one glacialist. It is true that a forward oscillation of the ice edge might be more forceful than an earlier forward movement which might have reached a greater extension. In itself, therefore, this line of evidence can not be regarded as possessing great value.

It has been indicated that under certain circumstances, and in certain relations, some of the foregoing criteria, taken singly, may be conclusive of glaciations so distinct from each other, as to make their reference to separate epochs proper. But where the facts and relations which constitute one of the criteria are found, the facts and relations constituting one or more of the others are likely to be found as well. Where two of the foregoing criteria are found to be coexistent, their joint force is greater than that of either one. If neither one be absolutely conclusive, the two may still be, since the one may exactly meet the deficiency of the other. If three or more concurrent lines of evidence exist in any locality, the case is still further strengthened. We maintain that several of the foregoing criteria may be so related to each other and to the formations concerned, as not only to make the recognition of separate ice epochs proper, but to make the failure of such recognition altogether unscientific. Even when a single line of evidence, or when double, or triple, or quadruple lines of evidence are not absolutely conclusive in ruling out every conceivable technical escape from the conclusion that there were separate ice epochs, their cumulative and corroborative force may still be such as to carry conviction scarcely less positive than that which mathematical demonstration would afford. In the nature of the case not all of these various lines of evidence could be expected to be found in any one locality, or perhaps in any one limited geographic area, but where one occurs, some or all of the others are liable to be found under favoring circumstance. The number of criteria, and the great extent of area where they may hope for application, afford great possibilities.

From the foregoing discussion, it will be readily seen that the nature of the criteria and the limitations imposed upon their application by the difficulty of proving stratigraphic continuity in such a formation as the drift, necessitate the greatest care in their use, and reduce the value of hasty and inexpert conclusions to a minimum.

IV. Areas Where the Criteria find Readiest Application.

The foregoing criteria find their readiest application in regions where a later sheet of drift, suspected of belonging to a later ice epoch, failed to reach the border of an earlier sheet of drift, suspected of belonging to an earlier ice epoch. The 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, 5th and 10th as enumerated above, find their application wholly within the area affected by the drift of the separate epochs, if such there were. While within this general area they may be looked for at any point, they are likely to be of rare occurrence, except along a somewhat narrow belt, say 50 to 100 miles, adjacent to the border of the lesser ice advance. The conditions for their occurrence and detection are greatly favored if the lesser drift sheet be the later. The 6th, 7th, 9th and 12th criteria might hope for application within the same belt, but especially along a narrow zone on either side of the margin of the later drift sheet. It is along this zone that the types of surface are thrown into sharpest contrast, both as to material and topography. The 8th and 11th criteria have still wider limits of application, both within and without the border of the lesser ice advance.

Rollin D. Salisbury.