PART i .j l^ldvj'o)d: PiiliBoutolofjjccil liclutio^is of iliQ Goudivuuct S^sisMt 187 
beds) as cai’boniferous. I then shewed the connexion between the flora of the 
upper and lower coal measures in Australia taken together, and that of the 
Damuda beds. 
The above would really be a reply to all that is stated in the sentence above 
r|uoted. h)r. Ifeistmantel has not answered me. He has merely traversed an 
argument which diifej-s materially from that I used. But in the course of his 
remarks he enters into the real question at issue and makes several atemonts 
which, if correct, would have some weight as opposed to my opinion. I shall, 
therefore, shew how far these statements are in accordance with the facts made 
known by various Australian geologists. 
I have already twice had to refer to Dr. Feistmantel’s classification of the 
Australian rocks. Here it is'— 
Upper coal measures. 
Lower coal measures. 
Culm series. 
Devonian. 
fBods in Tasmania, ) , T 
I ^ , , ,r. , • I Without New South Wales. 
(■No animals. 
1 Beds with marine plants intercalated with plant-beds. Especially 
} Stony Creek, Eix. Ck., Greta., Mnt. Wingen, ifcc. 
( Again marine beds. 
j Smith Creek. 1 Lower carboniferous plants with carboniferous 
( Port Stefens. ( animals. 
Goonoo-goonoo. Plant-remains only. 
mueensianci, victoria. ) 
i Clarence river. 
■{ Wyanamatta beds. 
Ilawkesbury bods. 
Bowenfels. 
i_ Upper beds in Newcastle. 
This Dr. Feistmantel states'^ is “the succession of the several strata of the 
Australian coal formation, as Mr. Clarke communicated it to mo in a late paper, 
and as it is to be foundin his ‘ Remarks.’ ” It is to be regretted that Dr. Feist¬ 
mantel has not given a reference to the Rev. Mr. Clarke’s paper, because thei’e 
i.s, so far as I can see, nothing in the “ remarks’’ w'hich can be quoted to justify 
the classification adopted, and the union of the Wyanamatta, Hawkesbury and 
Newcastle beds into one subdivision as upper coal measures, and their separation 
from the lower coal measures are so entirely opposed to all that Mr. Clarke has 
written on the subject, that it is to be hoped Dr. Feistmantel will cither publish 
Mr. Clarke’s own words, or admit that he has arranged the section to suit his 
own views. The beds in Tasmania, Queensland, &c., have nothing to do with the 
main question and only tend to distract attention from the typical sequence 
in New South Wales. In the printed paper of Mr. Clarke’s," to which we have 
all hitherto referred for the classification of the Australian (New South Wales) 
plant-bearing rocks, they are thus arrranged— 
1. Wyanamatta beds. 3. Coal seams of Newcastle, &o. 
2. Hawkesbury rocks. 4. Lower carboniferous rocks. 
* Rec. G. S. I., Vol. IX, p. 123. = I, c. 
^ Q. .1. G. S., 1&6I, Vol. XVIT, pp. 3.57, 358, &c. 
S 
