ent of the lower Mississippian and the upper Mississippian is the most popular theory. And it was pointed out by Dr. W. F. Cummings of Houston, termed the patriarch of the profession, that he put the bend in Texas geology many years ago and that he was not considering the upper members of the series as they are now considered to be a part of the bend. He defended the theory that the whole series is Pennsylvanian and attempted to show this by paleontological researches. It was pointed out by Professor Charles Schuchert of Yale University that the underlying Ellenberger Limestone is the only good place upon which to correlate, and then he raised a question as to whether the so-called Ellenberger is Ellenberger all the way north. It was a lively and wit-sharpening discussion that the petroleum geologists had over the bend, the producing formation in the new Texas fields. Meeting Opens With Welcome. Alexander Deussen of Houston, president of the association, called the association to order at 11 o'clock and introduced Gilbert H. Irish of Dallas, who welcomed the association on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce. David White of the United States Geological Survey spoke briefly, expressing surprise at the large attendance. It is the biggest meeting ever held by the association. He was followed by J. C. White, geologist of the State of West Virginia, who reviewed the early history of petroleum geology and told of the deepest well in the United States, drilled in that State last year, which was lost at 7,386 feet. Professor J. A. Udden of the University of Texas told of the vicissitudes of Texas geological work and expressed the hope that some day Texas will be classed as a great State intellectually, as it is now in other ways. Dr. W. F. Cummings of Houston told of his early work in the Permian of Texas and of his work with Dr. Dumble in Texas geological surveys years ago. He related an anecdote of 1862, when the Confederate States needed copper for percussion caps, and of his accompanying other geologists to Archer County, where a quantity of copper was taken from the earth and made up into munitions in Austin. He said he is holding some aces to play in the speculations that are now being made about the bend. J. A. Taft, geologist for the Southern Pacific and the associated oil companies of California, spoke briefly in response to an invitation, as did T. R. Gregory of the National War Service Petroleum Committee, and Lee Haggar of Houston. Surface Geology in Texas. In the afternoon John D. Udden of the Sinclair Gulf Company led a discussion with a paper on the subsurface geology of the North Central Texas region. He presented cuttings from the Ledbetter well, Stephens County, and described the formations. It was his paper that brought on the discussion as to the value of fossils and of the work of the paleontologist. Charles R. Eckes of the Texas Company discussed cuttings from the Duffer well of that company a mile west of Ranger. Others who joined in the discussion of Mr. Udden's subject included Richard Hughes of the Cosden Company, F. B. Plummer of the Roxana Company, W. G. Matteson of Fort Worth, Dr. David White of Washington, Professor Charles Schuchert of Yale and others. Dr. David White read a paper by Dr. G. H. Girty of the United States Geological Survey, in which he advanced arguments to prove that the bend is Mississippian in its lower and Pennsylvanian in its upper phases. Dr. White expressed regret that there is woeful lack of ability among drillers to make proper and responsive logs of their wells, and blamed it to lack of intelligent co-operation between the geologists and drillers. He said the geolo-