Thomson .—Geology of Middle Waipura and Wtka Pass District. 403 



contention that no Tertiary species were found below the contact McKay 

 published a list of Tertiary species found below the Amuri limestone in 

 North Canterbury and Marlborough. As no descriptions or figures of 

 these species were supplied, and as the statement rested solely on McKay's 

 identifications, it did not gain acceptance, and Woods's later study of the 

 Cretaceous Pelecypoda does not bear it out. It should be noted, however, 

 that Henderson (1918) collected a shell from beds below the Amuri lime- 

 stone of the Cheviot district which was determined by Suter as Malletia 

 australis (Q. & G.). The existence of a few of the wide-ranging Oamaruian 

 Mollusca below the Amuri limestone would not excite surprise, and, though 

 invalidating the absolute truth of Hutton's contention, would not destroy 

 the truth of the claim that the faunas known from the rocks above and 

 below the contact are characteristically distinct. Hector's first claim, that 

 the Cretaceo-Tertiary formation is a satisfactory unit in the classification 

 of the Waipara sequence, has been destroyed by Hutton's criticisms, rein- 

 forced by later studies. 



It should be noted that von Haast adopted a grouping of the rocks 

 different from those of both Hector and Hutton, and included all the beds 

 from the coal-measures to the top of the Weka Pass stone in a Waipara 

 system of Cretaceo-Tertiary age. The correlations he claimed for this 

 system were those of Hutton's Waipara system and not those of Hector's 

 Cretaceo-Tertiary formation. Park also in 1905 adopted the same grouping 

 as von Haast for his Cretaceous Waipara system, in the mistaken belief that 

 the Weka Pass stone contained no Tertiary fossils. Hutton's criticisms, 

 reinforced as above, are eqiially valid against these groupings of the Wai- 

 para rocks. 



Hector's second claim for the correlation in the Cretaceo-Tertiary for- 

 mation of all the important coal-measures rested on the following general 

 argument : — 



" In northern Canterbury, as far south as the Rakaia River, the coal 

 rocks are overlaid by fossiliferous strata, which, besides the Plesiosauroid 

 reptiles for which the Waipara district is famous, contain a few secondary 

 genera, such as Belemnites, Aporrhais, Inoceramus, and Trigonia ; but the 

 great mass of the associated moUuscan fauna agrees with that of the coal 

 rocks in other parts of New Zealand, while the specially Cretaceous forms 

 are rare or absent from the fossiliferous horizons immediately overlying the 

 coal-seams. If, therefore, after eliminating the comparatively few fossils 

 which form the peculiarities df two localities, the bulk of those remaining 

 are fomid to be the same, there need be no hesitation in consideiing strata 

 showing the same succession of like characters in its different divisions as 

 belonging to the same series ; and, if in any one of these localities there is 

 evidence that the beds are of Cretace'ous age, the other must be regarded 

 as of that age also. But if, in addition to this, there be, in those localities 

 where the lower beds lack fossils proving their Cretaceous age, a presence 

 of Cretaceous forms in the higher beds of the same series, the correct- 

 ness of the correlation will in this way be corroborated. It is partly by 

 evidence of this kind that the Cretaceous age of several of our coal-bearing 

 areas is sought to be established. 



" In South Canterbury, on the east coast of Otago, and on the west 

 coast of the South Island markedly. Cretaceous fossils are found in the 

 calcareous members of the higher part of the coal-bearing series. The 

 Cretaceous character of the Echinodermata found in the Cobden limestone, 

 also present in the Ototara stone, warrants the reference of these beds to 

 a period anterior to that of any Tertiary deposit in the Islands, the oldest 



