840 Transactions.— Geology. 
The particular case to which exception is taken, may be stated as fol- 
lows :—Dr. von Haast submits * that it is even more than probable that 
this large assemblage of beds,” which to evade difficulties of survey he had 
lumped as his Mount Torlesse formation, ‘‘ may belong to several distinct 
periods ranging from the paleozoic to the lower mesozoic, but hitherto it 
has been impossible to divide this formation, for the present at least, into 
smaller groups owing to the want of fossils.” Well, in the progress of the 
Geological Survey, the requisite fossils have been found and the subdivision 
made. Why should Dr. von Haast object? 
Art. XLIII— Analysis of Slate in contact with Granite from Preservation 
Inlet, New Zealand. By A. LivERsipoz, F.R.S., Professor of Chemistry 
and Mineralogy, University of Sydney. Communicated by Professor 
F. W. Hutton. 
[Read before the Philosophical Institute of Canterbury, 27th November, 1884.] 
Anatysits of a specimen of slate and granite in contact was read before the 
Otago Institute in November, 1877 (Trans. N.Z. Inst., 1877, p. 505). Since 
then a further analysis of another portion of the slate has been made with 
the following results :— 
ANALYSIS. 
Hygroscopie moisture .. $x A os 2 480 
Silica «m xs ‘ 53:350 
Alumina .. es we A 19:889 
Iron sesquioxide .. d. ; .- 9994 
» protoxide  .. He E is " me 
Manganese protoxide .. v. m $s £e 522 
ime os ee e v. is oo £s | 025 
Magnesia .. x is ai Ae E . 5060 
Potash yx + es os ee sa "FIM 
Soda .. oe ve oe 
Undetermined, combined water, etc. .. onl Ae 
Specific gravity oe 2°72 
The above results, in common with the first analysis, show that on the 
whole there is no very great similarity in composition between the granite 
and slate, such as might be expected were the granite merely a meta- 
morphosed or crystalline form of the slate; it would rather appear that the 
granite is distinctively intrusive, and not derived from the slate by meta- 
morphic action. 
