THE GEOLOGIST. 



working-seam, with 2 ft. parting of sandstone, Is reached at 97 ft. 10 in., 

 to which add 9 ft. difference of level = 106 ft. 10 in. ; and in " 200 ft." 

 shaft bottom of same seam, with 5 ft. parting of sandstone, is reached at 

 187 ft. 1 in., which gives a difference of 80 ft. 3 in. in 280 ft., or relation 

 of base to perpendicular 1:3-48. It will be seen from these figures that a 

 higher dip prevails between "working" and "ladder" than between 

 " working" and " 200 ft." shafts, and also that the strata intervening be- 

 tween "5 ft. 7 in." and " working " seams vary in thickness, and that we 

 cannot deal as with straight lines in the calculation of the general dip. I 

 have therefore taken the mean between the dip of the " 5 ft. 7 in." and 

 " working " seam, between " working " and " 200 ft." shafts, as the nearest 

 approximation for calculating the outcrop of the different strata. This is 

 81 ft. 9 in. in 280 ft. The relation of perpendicular to base 1 : 3'425 = 16° 

 nearly. This places the outcrop of the lowest stratum (Clarke's No. 25) 

 at a point 993 ft. S. 6° W. from the top of Eussell's " 200 ft." shaft, sup- 

 posing the surface of the ground at the same level. Outcrop of top of 

 bottom seam, 794 ft. ; ditto, working seam, 611 ft. ; ditto, splint seam, 573 

 ft. ; ditto, 5 ft. 7 in., 524 ft. And these are the positions assigned for the 

 various outcrops in the accompanying plan and section. When the de- 

 tails of these shafts were first made known by Mr. Clarke as a proof of the 

 Palaeozoic age of the coal, Spirifera Fenestella, etc., being found in 

 abundance above, and Glossopteris associated with and below the coal, it 

 was suggested by Professor M'Coy, that the data given by Mr. Clarke 

 showed the existence of a fault between " working " and " 200 ft." shaft, 

 and that possibly to this fault the reversion of beds might be due, but the 

 Palaeozoic character of the fauna was not called in question. This error 

 pose from taking the absolute distance between the shafts (360 ft.) 

 instead of the reduced distance to the line of dip of 280 ft. Eeferring 

 to the extension of Eussell's coal-seams to the northern railway, un- 

 fortunately at a point where no marked bed of Eussell's series can be 

 absolutely identified, we have an apparently unbroken series of strata 

 dipping in the same direction, and at about the same angle, as those 

 in Eussell's coal-pits, extending from a point at 19 miles 72 chains 

 from Honeysuckle Flat to 21 miles 37 chains from the same place, the 

 beds furthest to the eastward dipping at a greater angle. This affords a 

 thickness (taking the angle of dip at 16°) of 2365 ft. of strata, abounding 

 in fossil fauna from bottom to top, very low down in which coal-seams with 

 Glossopteris occur. Fossils from each of the cuttings on the railway and 

 from Eussell's shafts were procured, that palaeontologists may satisfy them- 

 selves of their European parallel. If it be admitted that the fauna found 

 in the upper strata of these shafts is Palaeozoic, then these coal-seams, at 

 least, are Palaeozoic, and Glossopteris has a much lower range than has 

 hitherto been assigned it, except by Mr. Clarke. Neither does there seem 

 any reason why Mr. Clarke should not place the Newcastle coal-seams 

 (his No. 3 Carboniferous group) in the upper portion of this Stony Creek 

 group, no known unconformity existing, since no fauna or flora typical of 

 the Mesozoic period has, I believe, yet been found in the said No. 3. This 

 brings me to the consideration of Mr. Clarke's present arrangement of the 

 Carboniferous series of New South Wales. First. " Wianamatta beds " 

 with insignificant coal-seams, the upper beds of which are the probable 

 equivalents of our Otway, Bellerine, and Waunon beds, in which Glosso- 

 pteris has not jet been found. Second. " Hawkesbuiy beds," with insig- 

 nificant coal-seams, and no Glossopteris. To this series Mr. Clarke refers 

 the Grampian sandstones of Victoria, though Mr. Selwyn places them 

 with No. 4. (By Grampian sandstones I mean the beds constituting the 



