302 
PATAGONIAN EXPEDITIONS : PALAEONTOLOGY. 
Unfortunately our information on Australian stratigraphy is very defec- 
tive, and especially as to their age we are again confronted with the same 
contradictory opinions that have been expressed in the case of New Zea- 
land and Patagonia. Most of the Australian Tertiary deposits belong, 
according to Tate (see Tate, Correlation of the marine Tertiaries of 
Australia in Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Australia, vol. 17, 1893, vol. 19, 1895, 
vol. 20, 1896), to the Eocene , and the same opinion is held by others. 
On the other hand, most of these beds have been classed with the Miocene 
by the Geological Survey of Victoria, while Harris (1897, P- J 5 )» although 
following Tate, expresses doubts as to the correct correlation of his 
“Eocene.” 
Tate’s determination of the age of these beds relies exclusively on the 
percentage of recent forms found in them. 1 As has been said above, we 
consider this line of evidence as entirely inadmissible, and since Tate has 
not tried to introduce any other proofs, we may safely say that there is no 
evidence at all warranting the reference of these beds to the Eocene. 
And, indeed, the writer is of the opinion that these Australian and Tas- 
manian beds are also to be regarded as Miocene , simply because, in that 
case, we would not have any discrepancies in the stratigraphical position 
of these species, which have been found both in Australia and New Zea- 
land. If we regard — as we actually do — the New Zealandian Pareora beds 
as Miocene, the Australian beds containing Pareora species (for instance 
Limopsis insolita , Dentalium niantelli') must be correlated with them, un- 
less other evidence points to a contrary conclusion ; but no proof of the 
latter kind has been offered so far. 
Of course, we do not claim that all of the Australian Tertiary is Mio- 
cene, but we should expect to find that other deposits are also represented 
there. All we wish to say is that beds corresponding in age to the Mio- 
cene Patagonian beds must be present in Australia and Tasmania, and 
that there are apparently faunistic relations between both continents. It 
is left for future investigation to ascertain how far this parallelism ex- 
tends, and we entertain no doubt that the faunal relations between Pata- 
gonia and Australia, as well as New Zealand, will prove a very fruitful 
and interesting subject for research. 
1 The same is true of the determination of the Eocene age of these beds by other writers ; 
for instance, Hall and Pritchard (see : Proc. R. Soc. Victoria, v. 7, 1894, p. 180, fif. and v. 8, 1895; 
p. 1 5 1, ff.) do not use any other method than that used by Tate. 
