[vOL. XI. 
142 Records of the Geological Survey of India. 
have, so far as I know, only been found in the upper coal measures and overlying 
groups. 
The next two quotations from the same work are from the reports by Mr. 
Wilkinson, the Government Geologist, and are perfectly clear. He says—‘ 
Tile upper coal measures in the western district are about 480 feet thick, resting conformably 
on the mai-ine beds of the lower coal measures. ” 
And again^—■ 
“ These marine beds are conformable to the overlying plant-beds of the upper coal measures, 
but rest unconforinably on the irpturued edges of Devonian strata. ” 
Mr. Clarke, too, in a footnote, p. 170, quotes a report of Mr. Daintree’s on the 
country between Newcastle and Stony Creek, in which the following passage 
occurs :—“ 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. ” The Stony Creek 
group is, of course, the same as the “ lower coal measures, ” with marine fossils. 
Mr. Daintree’s opinion is of importance, for he appears to have gone from 
Victoria to examine Mr. Clarke’s sections, the accuracy of which was doubted by 
the South Australian geologists, and to have confirmed Mr. Clarke’s views. 
These extracts are, I fear, tedious, but they are too important to be omitted, 
because they shew that Australian geologists do not admit the existence of any 
break between the upper and lowei- coal measures. 
The chardcteristicalUj piesozoio Tteniopteris Daintreei. —So far 1 have confined 
myself to the beds in New South Wales. As 1 stated at the outset, to mix up 
with them the beds of Tasmania, Queensland and Victoria tends to confuse. But 
as these latter beds are adduced a.s evidence of mesozoic age, it is as w'ell to ex¬ 
amine the proof. In the case of the Queensland beds, the age may at once be con¬ 
sidered as established on trustworthy evidence,’'^ the plant layers with TtBuiopjteris 
and other forms being above strata containing Jurassic marine fossils, whilst the 
beds with Glossopteris occur at a lower horizon associated with Palasozoic mol- 
lusca, &c., and underlying the Jurassic deposits unconformably. Now, the upper 
Queensland beds* are said to contain two species of plants which occur in other 
parts of Austi'alia. One of these is Tmniopteris Daintreei,^ and the clue afforded 
1 p. 130. 2 p. 132. 
3 Q. J. 6. S., vol. XXVIII, 1872, pp. 325, &c. 
" Eec. G. S. I., IX, pp. 123, 124. 
5 Tbe importance wbicb Dr. Feistmaiitel attaches to tbis fossil is noteworthy. Thus, at p. 136 
be writes, “The siime J’hijllolheca Australis, SlcCoy, is also known from Yictoiia, together with 
Trsniopteris Daintreei, McCoy, which latter in Queensland is considered as characteristic of the 
mesozoic (upper) coal beds.” Again, p. 138, “McCoy described it (Gangamopieris) lirst from some 
rocks in Victoria, where no marine fossils occur, but where Tceniopieris Daintreei, McCoy, is found, 
which latter in Queensland is considered as characteristic of the mesozoic beds there. VV^ith these 
also PhgUotheea Australis, McCoy, occurred in Victoria.” Again, at the bottom of the same page, 
“ This Oangamopteris is in Victoria found in certainly mesozoic rocks, being associated with 
Tceniopteris Daintreei, McCoy, which is characteristic of mesozoic rocks in Queenslandand finally 
