Froeeedinijs of the Roijal iSoc'iefij of Vlcturla. 273 



Mr. Pritchard said he would like to make a few remarks 

 on the diversity of opinion as to the age of these beds. Tlie 

 Bacchus Marsh beds had been originally set down as Tiiassic, 

 and the coal measures in Newcastle and in the neighbour- 

 hood of Sj'dtiey were originally set down as belonging to the 

 Mesozoic period, so that originally the Bacchus Marsh sand- 

 stones had been placed on a lower level than the Newcastle 

 coal series. xVt the present time, the Newcastle coal series 

 were known to belong to the carboniferous age, and the oidy 

 fossil remains which had been hitherto found in the Bacchus 

 Marsh sanstones were three species of the genus Gangamoj)- 

 teris. The genus itself had been found in the coal measures of 

 New South Wales, in connection with Glossopteris and othei- 

 geneiu, which were now looked upon as Mesozoic, and which 

 had always, up to the present time, l)een looked upon as 

 characteristically Mesozoic, but having been found together 

 with characteristic Pakieozoic plants and marine fossils, they 

 were looked upon now as an extension of the range of the 

 genus Glossopteri.s. This would seem to point to the 

 conclusion that the Bacchus Mar.sh sandstones might belong 

 to the carboniferous age. Some authorities looked upon the 

 Bacchus Marsh sandstone as belonging to the cai'boniferous 

 period. 



Mr. Dennaxt said he only referred to the roches mouton- 

 nees in connection with the claim made for Tei'tiary age. He 

 understood that Mr. James Dunn placed his deposit in the 

 cai'boniferous era, and evidently I'eferrecl to a diftei'ent epoch 

 to that which these gentlemen referred to when they spoke 

 of a post-Miocene glacial epoch. If the fauna did not 

 indicate necessarily the climate, at all events any glacial 

 epoch that might have occurred during Tertiary times nuist 

 have been of a veiy spasmodic nature. 



Mr. Cresswell asked whether the proposition that the 

 upper glacial bed was a post-Miocene deposit had not been 

 withch-awn. 



Mr. Officer said that in the paper it had been stated 

 that this bed probably belonged to the Tertiary, but they 

 had not attempted to assign it to any particular era in 

 Tertiary times. In fact they had expressh^ stated that they 

 were unable to find out its relation to the Miocene beds. 



Mr. Dexxant said, that being the case, most of his 

 remarks need not have been made, for he was only claiming 



