Mines and Mineral Statistics. 
i68 
and on the pnldished reports on these coal fields.” Tint even 
this is accompanied by a sneer at Mr. Keene’s blunders in 
Palfcontol ogy. 
Oil the above I Avould observe that, as I saw the collcctio-n 
referred to before it was despatched, I am prepared to say it did 
not completely represent the beds in the local district from which 
they came, and was only a partial display of the scries of the 
strata in association with coal througlioiit the Colony ; and thatin 
the arrangement ado])ted by Professor j\r‘Coy in the Jicjiort, most 
important portions of the beds are omitted. 1 would, tliercfore, 
attribute the “opinion” of the Board respecting the age of the 
New South AValcs Coal,” so authoritatively pronounced, to be 
based on imperfect data, sliowing that the gentlemen wlio liavo 
decided the question are i)vaetic((lh/ ignorant of the true 
grounds of decision, clearly not having made any inspection 
for themselves, and totally ignoring the opinions of tlie liost of 
observers who have certified to the contrary ; amongst whom is 
Mr. Daintree, a member of the Auctoi'ian Geological Survey, the 
late Mr. Stutchbury, who reported thereof ns well as many others 
who have studied the strata In situ, and are true witnesses against 
the side of fhe Oolitical party. In tlie ])leadings on that side, the 
reliable evidence that makes against them i.s “burked,” and afore- 
gone conclusion is olfcred as if it were final — and the judgment is 
delivered ex cathedra, whilst numerous witnesses of the first 
credibility are altogether ignored. This may be ]>rudent and 
ingoiiiuus, but it is f/e/ nor is it honest, yet it lielps 
to lunng out the magniliccut declaration : “ AVe confine ourselves 
to the statement not before ns a particle af evidence 
indicating that the coal seams now being worked iu Neiv South 
AVhiles are of Pala.H)zoic age.” K great compliment this to persons 
who havehihoured for yoarsto cstablishtriith; but they may console 
themselves with the reflection, that Frejuffcr est mat juffcrF 
Amidst this lamentable ingenuity to “tell the truth without telling 
tlie u'hole truth and notluug but the truth” and iu tlie arraying of 
evidence from beyond Australia instead of collecting the whole 
evidence furnished from itself, there is one grateful exception 
which, lliougli not entirely satisfactory, is much more so tlian some 
previous ])roccediiigs were. It would have been better to liave 
acknowledged the change. 
In the notes on Mr. Keene’s specimens, Professor AP Coy, 
though lie draw's a line where it ought not to be, lias clianged Ins 
method of putting his old opinions about the coal itself, inasmuch 
as he no longer makes use of the notion wdiich he once 
entertained and put in evidence before a Committee of the 
Melbourne Parliament. I must explain this. 
On the 20th November, 1857, ho was examined (as the Chair- 
man of a Mining Commission) on the character and extent of 
