CORRESPONDENCE. 245 
ing of stalagmite, covering the rock,” which Dr. von Haast, in 
your last number, calls “simply nonsense.” This is a sweeping 
criticism, but I do not see much force in it, nor do I see how it 
can get over the indubitable and easily proved fact that the 
paintings ave on stalagmite. The learned doctor goes on to say, 
“Tn the first place the rock is perfectly dry,”’—here I would 
remind him that the deposition of stalagmite is due to evapora- 
tion, and can only take place on highly inclined surfaces, when 
they are sometimes wet and sometimes dry, as no doubt is the 
case with the wall of the cave in question ; he proceeds, “and no 
stalagmite has ever been found there.” With all due deference 
to his superior knowledge of the locality, I am bound to say that 
I have in my possession specimens of stalagmite which I collected 
myself from the identical spot, and to prove to others the truth 
of my statement, I will exhibit these specimens at the next 
meeting of the Philosophical Institute of Canterbury. The layer 
of stalagmite is about ‘o2 inch in thickness, and in one case— 
from another cave in the neighbourhood—a considerable thick- 
ness of it overlies the red paint. 
Dr. von Haast still procecds, “ But the weathering of the 
rock has caused this peculiar scaling of the surface, so well known 
to geologists.” I have seen a good deal of weathered limestone 
in different parts of the world, but I have never seen the surface 
scale off in this way except where covered with stalagmite ; 
under other circumstances the rock crumbles into powder, and 
the surface often becomes honey-combed. I am not surprised 
that Dr. von Haast failed to notice the stalagmite in his early 
visits to the cave, but that he should have re-examined the place 
after the occurrence of stalagmite had been pointed out to -him, 
and that he should then have denied its existence, is indeed 
astonishing. It is not Mr. Maskell who has “ misunderstood 
some of our party conversant with geological evidence,” but Dr. 
von Haast himself who has misunderstood the geological 
evidence.—I am, &c., 
POW. ELTON. 
Christchurch, 20th July, 1882. 
SIR,—Will you allow me to explain that my remarks on the 
un-Maori-like character of the Weka Pass drawings, quoted by 
Mr. Maskell on page 66 of the N. Z. JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, 
were never meant to apply to all the drawings on the rock- 
shelter, though I omitted, in the brief note referred to, to limit 
their application. I ought at the time to have specified figures 
4, 14, and 27, and some of the smaller designs on Mr. Cousin’s 
plan accompanying Dr. von Haast’s paper. I cannot believe 
those figures to have been the production of any unaided Maori 
artist. 
Having seen the original drawings shortly after Mr. Cousin’s 
visit, I think it is only fair to him to state that I was surprised 
to find how accurately he had copied the figures selected for 
illustration. 
