Comparing our section of the Uspallata range with that of the Cumbre, we see, with the exception of the underlying clay-slate, and perhaps of the intrusive rocks of the axes, a striking dissimilarity in the strata composing them. The great porphyritic conglomerate formation has not extended as far as this range; nor have we here any of the gypseous strata, the magnesian and other limestones, the red sandstones, the siliceous beds with pebbles of quartz, and comparatively little of the conglomerates, all of which form such vast masses over the basal series in the main Cordillera. On the other hand, in the Cordillera, we do not find those endless varieties of indurated tuffs, with their numerous veins and concretionary arrangement, and those grit and mud stones, and singular semi-porcellanic rocks, so abundant in the Uspallata range. The submarine lavas, also, differ considerably; the feldspathic streams of the Cordillera contain much mica, which is absent in those of the Uspallata range: in this latter range we have seen on how grand a scale, basaltic lava has been poured forth, of which there is not a trace in the Cordillera. This dissimilarity is the more striking, considering that these two parallel chains are separated by a plain only between ten and fifteen miles in width; and that the Uspallata lavas, as well as no doubt the alternating tufaceous beds, have proceeded from the west, from points apparently between the two ranges. To imagine that these two piles of strata were contemporaneously deposited in two closely adjoining, very deep, submarine areas, separated from each other by a lofty ridge, where a plain now extends, would be a gratuitous hypothesis. And had they been contemporaneously deposited, without any such dividing ridge, surely some of the gypseous and other sedimentary matter forming such immensely thick masses in the Cordillera, would have extended this short distance eastwards; and surely some of the Uspallata tuffs and basalts also accumulated to so great a thickness, would have extended a little westward. Hence I conclude, that it is far from probable that these two series are not contemporaneous; but that the strata of one of the chains were deposited, and even the chain itself uplifted, before the formation of the other:—which chain, then, is the oldest? Considering that in the Uspallata range the lowest strata on the western flank lie unconformably on the clay- slate, as probably is the case with those on the eastern flank, whereas in the Cordillera all the overlying strata lie conformably on this formation:—considering that in the Uspallata range some of the beds, both low down and high up in the series, are marked with vegetable impressions, showing the continued existence of neighbouring land;—considering the close general resemblance between the deposits of this range and those of tertiary origin in several parts of the continent;—and lastly, even considering the lesser height