142 
. X : .a .. I . _ . •. I 
The N.Z. Journal of Science and Technology. [June 
REVIEWS fAND ABSTRACTS. 
Die Geologie von Neuseeland, by 0. Wilckens. Geol. Rundschau, Bd. viii. 
Heft 3-4, 1917. 
This paper contains a review of Park’s Geology of New Zealand , 1910 ; 
of Marshall’s “ New Zealand and Adjacent Islands ” ( Handbuch der regionalen 
Geologie), 1911 ; and of Marshall’s Geology of New Zealand, 1912. Then 
follow observations on the structure of the main mountain-ranges of this 
country as interpreted by various authors. 
Noteworthy among the criticisms of Park’s work are : (1.) The sudden 
termination of the Kakanui zone north of Lake Wanaka, in a line directly 
across the strike, and its substitution by Mesozoic beds. (2.) The classi¬ 
fication of the sandstone and greywacke of the Ruahine Chain in the Jurassic 
because of Terehellina McKayi (Bather): “ We would rather, with Jaworsky, 
put it in the Trias.” (3.) The use of Te Anau as a series-name in the 
Te Anau system. 
In the case of Marshall’s works, exception is taken to the placing of the 
Schist, the Trias, and the Jura under one system in the text, while on the 
map they are shown separately. With regard to the Oamaru system, 
“ New Zealand geologists often stress the impossibility of confining the 
geological formations of their country to the stratigraphical scheme of Europe. 
To this one may agree in so far as it does not involve the renunciation 
of the correlation of New Zealand rock successions with the international 
scheme, which is absolutely necessary if we would gain a clear idea of the 
geological history of New Zealand, bound up as it is with that of the rest 
of the world, and especially with that of the West Pacific. Hence it is 
not permissible that Upper Cretaceous and Tertiary should be united in 
a single Oamaru system, as is done by Marshall. It is affirmed that the 
Waipara and Oamaru beds are fully concordant; but if a dislocation dis¬ 
cordance is not present, still there occur in the former typical Mesozoic and 
in the latter typical Tertiary fossils. For this reason both series ought not 
to be united : the one is Upper Cretaceous and the other Older Tertiary. 
. . . A similar occurrence is the overlying of Senonian by Tertiary 
greensand without demonstrable discordance at Algarrobo, on the Chilian 
coast, which is elucidated bv Briiggen. The want of a clear discordance 
is immaterial : the fossil content decides.” 
The following points of disagreement between the two authors are 
noted : (1) In table of classifications— e.g., the position of the Maitai series, 
the limits of the Manapouri system, &c. ; (2) the extension of the Trias 
in the Ruahines and Coromandel; (3) the extension of the volcanic rocks 
at Mount Egmont ; (4) the extension of the eruptives in Auckland Pen¬ 
insula and west of Oamaru ; (5) the northerly extension of the Schist zone 
of the South Island ; (6) the extension of the glaciation ; (7) the age of the 
younger sedimentaries south of Tasman Bay ; (8) the age of the gneiss of 
West a Otago and its relation to the mountain-building. 
A comparison of the Southern Alps with the European Alps is outlined. 
Both have an S-shaped form ; the south-western part of the Southern Alps 
describes a sharp bend, as in the western Alps ; in the north of the South 
Island the Palaeozoic folded mass of the Tasman Mountains is stretched 
out in front of the folded range as the Bohemian mass of the Eastern Alps. 
In the North Island there is a virgation like that at the east end of the Alps. 
The overthrust of the Tertiary beds by Trias in Nelson is comparable with 
