540 Prof. J. Park — Tertiaries and Cretaceous, New Zealand. 



subject involves something move than a mere academic discussion. 

 If conformity exists, then we have only one coal-bearing formation ; 

 but if unconformity, then we have two. I believe that both the strati- 

 graphical and palseontological evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of 

 the latter. 



In volume xliii of the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, 

 Dr. P. Marshall and Messrs. R. Speight and C. A. Cotton in a paper 

 on the "Younger Rock Series of New Zealand" express the view 

 that there is no stratigraphical break from the Cretaceous to the 

 Pliocene, a contention mainly based on their interpretation of the 

 Waipara section in North Canterbury. This section, be it noted, 

 was responsible for the adoption of the Cretaceo-Tertiary theory 

 by the old Geological Survey under Sir James Hector. A better 

 knowledge of the geology of the country showed that this position 

 was untenable. As time went on, and fresh discovery took place, 

 it became more and more evident that the so-called Cretaceo-Tertiary 

 succession consisted of two distinct unconformable series, the one with 

 a distinctively Tertiary fauna, the other with an equally distinctive 

 Cretaceous fauna. 



While the theory lasted it led to many incorrect correlations of 

 distant beds. Clayey beds, for example, found below the Ototara 

 Stone were everywhere called Aniuri Limestone ; greensands con- 

 taining 20 per cent of living forms were correlated with sandy 

 beds yielding Saurians, Belemnites, etc. ; and the term Grey Marls 

 was applied to any grey sandy bed in contact with the Weka 

 Pass Stone. 



The confusion introduced by the Cretaceo-Tertiary theory soon 

 became an almost inextricable tangle, on all fours with the famous 

 Cretaceo-Eocene tumble of the Laramie, where it was found that the 

 confusion arose through the erroneous correlation of horizons in 

 distant places, afterwards proved by closer examination to belong to 

 two distinct formations, namely an Upper Cretaceous and a Lower 

 Tertiary. 



The time-worn Cretaceo-Tertiary theory of New Zealand was first 

 abandoned by its sponsor, Captain Hutton, then by Professor Cox, and 

 afterwards by myself. For over twenty years it has found no defender 

 or exponent among the field geologists of the country, and, moreover, 

 it was not recognized in the new classification of formations drawn up 

 for the new Geological Suiwey. 



The confusion arose (a) through the coincidence that the successions 

 of strata in the Lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous formations bear 

 a general lithological l-esemblance to one another ; (b) that at Waipara 

 the Tertiary Series seemed to be conformable to the Cretaceous Series. 



The Lower Tertiary Series, best known as the Oamaru Series, occurs 

 as a dissected marginal sheet in both islands, while the Cretaceous, or 

 Waipara Series, is restricted to a few isolated patches in each island. 

 The Tertiary Series almost everywhere rests on the highly denuded 

 surfaces of Jurassic or older rocks. In a few places only does it touch 

 the Cretaceous Series. 



Both the Tertiary and Cretaceous Series represent a complete cycle 

 of deposition during subsidence, each beginning with fluviatile drifts, 



