Mahshaij., Sim;i<;ht, Cotton. — Youinjcr Ilorl-xcrie.'' of X .'/ . 407 



lie says, is comparable with the Eiuo])eau Eocene, with a slightly nioie 

 Cretaceous complexion.* 



Tenisou-Woods says of the corals, '" I have no doubt that fi'om the 

 fossil corals the formation at Oamaru and that at Momit Gambier (of Aus- 

 tralia) were contemporaneous. The stage accepted by him for the latter is a 

 stage later than the Upper Eocene. f The same author examined the Bryozoa 

 and compared them closely with the Mount Gambier formation of Australia. 



Stache examined the Foraminijera obtained by the " Novara " expedi- 

 tion from Kaglan and Whaingaroa. He classes them as the same age as 

 those of the Vienna basin or of the Upper Oligocene of north Germany.^ 



Hinde and Holmes classified sponge-spicules from Oamaru. They class 

 the deposit as belonging to the Upper Eocene or 01igocene.§ 



In addition to these, the sharks' teeth of the greensand have been 

 examined by Davis, who, how^ever, makes no suggestion as to the age of the 

 beds in which the}; occur. 



It is evident that there is a general consensus in favour of the limestone 

 from which all these groups of fossils have been obtained being classed 

 with the early Tertiary, between the late Eocene and the late Oligocene. 

 At present we do not intend any further correlation than this, and we 

 believe that the late Cretaceous or early Eocene may be taken as the age 

 of the oldest bed, the Oligocene as the age of the limestone, and the late 

 Miocene or Pliocene as that of the youngest bed in the conformable seriea 

 at Waipara. A sk(3leton classification is thus formed which can satisfac- 

 torily be filled up by the other members of the series. 



It is the intention of the authors to state fully the palaeontological side 

 of the question in future papers. 



VII. Summary and Conclusions. 



1. In all the sections of this series of younger rocks that we have had 

 opportunities of examining in different parts of the country we have been 

 unable to find any evidence of a stratigraphical unconformity in a single 

 instance, though our observations have extended over those sections that 

 have been regarded as crucial by diiSerent observers. 



2. Though every geologist who has written about these sections pre- 

 viously has at one time or other insisted upon the existence of stratigraphical 

 breaks, each observer has placed these in a different position in the series 

 from the others. 



3. The palaeontological evidence shows that the fauna which existed 

 when the upper beds were deposited was very different from that which 

 existed when the lower beds were deposited. It is also suggested that this 

 rapidity of faunal change is more apparent than real, and that the strata 

 of this series were deposited at a very slow rate. 



4. Correlation has been confused because the overlapping nature of the 

 upper members of the series has not been fully recognized. There is reason 

 for supposing that it is correct to correlate all the conspicuous limestones 

 of this younger series as contemporaneous. 



5. So far as correlation with the European geological system is con- 

 cerned, the limestone appears to be of early Oligocene age. The lowest beds 

 of the series are perhaps Cretaceous, and the upper perhaps of Pliocene age. 



* N.Z.G.S., 1892-93, p. 121. 



t ■' Palaeontology of New Zealand," pt. 4, 188U, p. 4. 

 % " Reise der ' Novara ' : Palaeontology,'" p. 299. 

 § Journ. Linn. Soc., ZooL, vol. 24, 1892, p. 178. 



