72 



THE GEOLOGIST. 



COLONIAL GEOLOGY. 

 AGE OF NEW SOUTH WALES COAL-BEDS. 

 By Me. Dainteee. 



The 'Yeoman, and Australian Acclimatize!*,' publishes an article on the 

 " Age of the New South Wales Coal-beds," by Mr. Baintree, one of the 

 gentlemen connected with the Geological Survey Department of this co- 

 lony, from notes collected " during a three months trip from Melbourne 

 to the Upper Burdekin, Queensland." One of the most important facts 

 mentioned in these notes refers to the dispute which has been long pend- 

 ing between the Rev. Mr. Clarke, of New South Wales, and Professor 

 M'Coy, as to the age of the New South Wales coal-fields. It must be 

 satisfactory to Mr. Clarke to find that a gentleman of Mr. Daintree's ex- 

 perience and undoubted qualifications has done something towards turn- 

 ing the dispute in his favour. 



The history of this dispute, says our contemporary, deserves attention. 

 The Eev. W. B. Clarke, of New South Wales, has long been distinguished 

 as one of the best practical geologists in this hemisphere. In numerous 

 instances he pointed out where gold deposits would be found long prior to 

 their actual discovery. He had also examined and reported upon the 

 coal-strata of the sister-colony, and from a careful observation of the 

 strata in position, and by the character of the fossil remains, he had ar- 

 rived at the conclusion that some of the coal-beds of New South Wales 

 are of the same age as the Lower Carboniferous series of Europe. Pro- 

 fessor M'Coy, however, before he left England, had adopted a notion that 

 the New South Wales coal is Oolitic, but that the marine fossils in the 

 same neighbourhood, often found in contact with the coal-beds, are Lower 

 Carboniferous. With a pertinacity almost amounting to stubbornness, 

 Professor M'Coy has adhered to the notion he had formed. After the 

 Professor removed to the southern hemisphere, he did not think it worth 

 while to visit the coal-beds in dispute, but continued to controvert, often 

 with unseemly and even reprehensible bitterness, the opinions of Mr. 

 Clarke, who took an early opportunity of asking European geologists to 

 suspend their judgment in the matter for a time, as he felt perfectly 

 convinced of victory in the end. Mr. Clarke's argument was, that the 

 coal could not be Oolitic and the marine fossils Lower Carboniferous, for 

 in one locality examined— namely, Russell's pits, Stony Creek, Maitlaiid 

 (and at other places) — the coal-seams, with the plants in dispute, lie along 

 wa} r below the marine beds. Some years ago Mr. Clarke sent a section of 

 the coal-strata to the Royal Society of Victoria. Professor M'Coy and 

 Mr. Selwyn rejected it, on the pretence that there was a " fault " in the 

 strata ; and in the opening address of the president of the society (Sir 

 Henry Barkly) in 1861, judgment was given against the opinions of Mr. 

 Clarke. Throughout the dispute, that gentleman has been often unfairly 

 dealt with, and harder things have been said than have appeared in print. 

 In vol. v. p. 107, of the Transactions of the Royal Society of Victoria, there 

 is a passage in a paper by Professor M'Coy, pretending that Mr. Clarke told 

 him and Mr. Selwyn that the specimen produced by Mr. Clarke in proof 

 of his opinion was one of plants belonging to beds from which it had 

 fallen, or might have fallen, from the top to the bottom of the shaft. Mr. 

 Clarke replied to this statement, but it was afterwards repeated {vide p. 

 217, vol. v. of the Royal Society's Transactions), as if Mr. Clarke, who 



