555 
To tlie foregoing list there are to be added tlie fossils fi’om the Coohtown and 
Palmer Railway, collected by Mr. Maitland, as already mentioned. Mr. Maitland refers * 
to MaccoycUa ? and Bliynohonella, but the collection has not yet been examined by my 
Colleague, and so far as we know, adds no new species to the Desert Sandstone list. 
Of the above, the following species of Polccypoda are common to the De.sert 
Sandstone (including the Maryborough Beds) and Rolling Downs Formations; 
MaccoyelU BarMyi, M. reflnetn, M. umbomlU, M. corhienus, 31. subutriafn, Nucula 
qiiairata, Oyprina Olarhei, and Olycimeriif vugosn, and also the Gasteropod Natica 
vat'iaUlis, and the following genera — BliyncloneUa, Ostrea, Limn, Pseiuhxvicula, 
Macmjclla, CucwllcRa, Nucnla, Triyonia, Cyprhia, PaUommra, Qhjehnerh, Pecten, 
Natica, and Pele.menites ; so that a strong case can be made out in favour of a connection 
between the Rolling Downs and Desert Sandstone. It must, however, be remembered 
that the original fossils from Wallumbilla, Mount Abundance, and Mount Corby, upon 
which several of the above identifications rest, were collected without any idea that a 
distinction could bo made between the Desert Sandstone tablelands and the underlying 
Rolling Downs Formation. It is just possible, therefore, that some of the fossils quoted 
as belonging to the Rolling Downs ought to be credited to the Desert Sandstone. 
In the above list we have an assemblage of fossils of decidedly Cretaceous types, 
and possessing much in common with the Rolling Downs Formation. We may therefore 
with safety separate the Cretaceous rocks mot with in Queensland into a Lower and 
Upper Series, the latter being our Desert Sandstone, which is separated from the Rolling 
Downs Formation by an unmistakable unconformability. At the time when Mr. 
Daintree and Mr. R. Etheridge, F.R.S., wrote their Papers on the Geology and 
Paleontology of Queensland (1872), no determinable fossils had as yet been obtained 
from the Desert Sandstone, but the Maryborough Beds had yielded a considerable 
number, on the strength of which Mr. Etheridge placed the latter beneath the 
Hughenden and Marathon bed.s. We now unite the Desert Sandstone and Mary- 
borough Beds, on the ground of the similarity of their organic remains, and the Desert 
Sandstone has been observed to rest unconformably on the Hughenden Beds. Taking 
this break into consideration, Daintree regarded the Desert Sandstone as Tertiary. The 
fossils which, in the last few year.s, have been discovered in the Desert Sandstone at 
Croydon and Cooktown show that the formation has much in common with the Rolling 
Downs or Lower Cretaceous, and nothing in common with the Tertiary. Lithologically 
it has always seemed to me that the well-eonsolidated and occasionally quasi-vitrifled or 
porcellanised strata of the Desert Sandstone were singularly unlike any of the compara- 
tively loose and unconsolidated deposits ascribed in Australia to the Tertiary age. Ihe 
late Rev. .f. E. Tenison Woods even went so far at one time as to regard the Desert 
Sandstone, on the ground of lithological similarity, as the equivalent of the Uawkesbury 
Sandstone— which, however, is quite untenable in the face of the fact that it is newer 
than the Lower Cretaceous. Lithological resemblance in such a case does not count tor 
much, as one siliceous sandstone is very like another, whatever may have been the date 
of its deposition. 
MINES CONNECTED WITH THE DESERT SANDSTONE. 
The presence of coal in the Desert Sandstone is now well known. In a previous 
portion of this chapter descriptions of the coal at Cooktown and in the Capo Aork 
Peninsula have been given. , -r. 
Speculations as to the existence of deep auriferous leads beneath the Desert 
Sandstone will be found on page 539. _ 
“ * And in all probability correctly so. [R.E. J him’.) 
