Hector. — On Geological Structure of Canterbury Mountains. 837 



Fortunately the evidence before us will remain there for all time to come 

 (not geologically speaking), and our successors will be best able to judge 

 what is really the truth, which we all ought earnestly to strive to discover. 



Art. XLII. — Note on Geological Structure of the Canterbury Mountains. 

 By Dr. Hector, Director of the Geological Survey of New Zealand. 

 [Read before the Wellington Philosophical Society, 13th February, 18S5.] 

 The following note is an abstract of a paper that will appear in the Geo- 

 logical Eeports in reply to a recent paper by Professor von Haast*, which 

 impugns the correctness of a small sketch map of the geology of New 

 Zealand, which I issued in 1883. 



The chief, or rather almost the only geological contention in the paper 

 referred to is that there is no evidence known to Dr. von Haast that 

 warrants the subdivision of his Mount Torlesse formation, of which 

 he says "the greatest portion of the Provincial District of Canterbury 

 is composed." This formation he maintains to be of Lower Carboni- 

 ferous or Upper Devonian age : Firstly, because certain fossils which he 

 discovered in 1861 at Mount Potts, comprising fossil shells and saurian 

 bones were by Professor McCoy, of Melbourne University, pronounced to 

 belong to that horizon : Secondly, fossil plants which he obtained at the 

 same time from the Clent Hills, twelve miles from Mount Potts, are stated 

 to have been referred by the same distinguished palaeontologist to a Jurassic 

 formation: and Thirdly, both animal and plant fossils from these localities 

 are stated on Professor McCoy's authority to be " identical with exuviae 

 found in the coal-fields of New South Wales." 



Unfortunately, I am unable to refer to the wording of Professor McCoy's 

 deliverance on this matter, as it has never been published, so far as I am 

 aware. If, however, it is true that fossils among which were saurian bones 

 were really sent to Professor McCoy hi 1861, and he felt compelled to refer 

 them to a Devonian or Lower Carboniferous formation, I cannot but think 

 that such a renowned master hi palaeontology would have long smce em- 

 phatically enforced such an important discovery, for, as geologists are aware, 

 even to this day the earliest trace of a saurian is only found hi Permian 

 formations. 



However, in a paper published in 1879, t which has perhaps escaped 

 Dr. von Haast's notice, I pointed out, after personal inspection, that the 



* Art. xli., ante. 

 t Trans. Eoy. Soe. N.S.W., 1879, and abstracts in Prog. Eept. N.Z. Geol, Surv., 1879. 

 22 



