New South Wales. 
47 
Several species of plants are described by Dr. Newberry, and 
assigned to either a Triassic or a Jurassic age, leaving that age 
undetermined (from want of sufficient evidence) in a large part 
of the great Coal-fields of China, basing his “ conclusion on the 
entire absence of Carboniferous plants from the collection , and 
the presence of well-marked Oycads, species of Podozamites and 
Pterozamites closely allied to if not identical with some hereto¬ 
fore found in Europe and America.” He then says— “ the Coal 
basins yon visited are all Mesozoic, and not Carboniferous.” 
Towards the close of his letter he arranges the plants in four 
divisions, assigning them all with the exception of one plant to 
Triassic beds, the exception being one Podozamites, which 
“ resembles ” a European Jurassic plant, the other apparently being 
u identical with an American Triassic species.” There is also 
a Pecopteris having a remarkable likeness to P. Whitbyensis , 
(which on comparing Puuipelly’s figure with those given by 
Lindlcy and Hutton and A. Brogniart, I should hesitate to say 
is actually identical with the Scarborough species— though all 
the figures have some resemblances to each other), and which 
Mr. P. says is too imperfect to determine accurately. There are 
other plants, but the balance is with by far the majority, with 
Triassic beds in Europe, North Carolina, \ r irginia and Mexico. 
A few new plants are also mentioned. 
When, therefore, such statements are cited to prove the 
Oolitic or Jurassic character of our New South Wales Coal, we 
might reasonably expect to find that the prominent plants in our 
Coal Measures have a place in the Chinese Coal Measures seeing 
that the latter are brought out in evidence to weigh down all 
opposition to the preconceived opinion on the subject of age. 
But what do ice find? we find tlie following in the heart of Dr. 
Newberry’s letter. 
“ We have of course no right to assume from the interesting 
facts your explorations have brought to light, that no Carboni¬ 
ferous Coal exists in China, for it may very well happen, that as 
in our own country Coal-seams of economical value, but ot 
different ages, will be found there, at points not greatly removed 
from each other. But geologists will not fail to be deeply 
interested in the fact, that so large ])ortions of the Coal-basins ot 
China, including beds of both anthracite and bituminous Coal — 
worked for hundreds of years, probably the oldest mines in the 
world — are wholly excluded from the Carboniferous formation. 
So larye a Coal-bearing area, indeed, that when joined to the 
Triassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary Coals of North America, they 
quite overshadow the Carboniferous Coals of Europe and the 
Mississippi Valley, and suggest the question, whether the name 
given to the formation which includes the most important 
European strata has not been somewhat hastily chosen. Another 
