New South Wales . 
81 
govern, but must be subordinate to the fauna’; and further he 
says, ‘ Why might it ( Glossopteris ) not pass into Secondary rocks 
without denying its existence in the Australian Lower Coal- 
measures’ ? ’ [ In MS. he adds, ‘‘What I completely adopt.”] 
At p. 125, he says—“That the Upper beds in Australia— 
AVianamatta, Hawkesbury — and the Upper Newcastle Coal-beds 
form a connected series, is also shown by the occurrence of the 
same fish, which is not found in the Lower strata. 
“ The following table may illustrate the relations : — 
Europe. 
Lower Gondwlnas, India. 
Coal Measures in Australia. 
Rha?tic.*) Upper 
Kcuper ... ) Trias 
Gres bigarre { Lower 
Bunt, sanst. ] Trias 
Carboniferous 
Carboniferous 
Devonian ? 
f Panchet group— 
( Flora and Reptilia. 
( Damuda group — 
( Flora only. 
. 
“ Records,” ix, p. 125. 
f a. Upper Coal Measures. 
1 Ml the strata as I enume- 
*J rated them above under | 
1 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. 
\^ Flora only. 
b. Lower Coal Measures. , 
[In MS. lie adds Plants ( 
and Carboniferous fauna.] ! 
Strata below. 
Goonoo Goonoo. 
In relation to these printed notices, Dr. Ueistmantel writes 
privately, “ Qlossopteris began to live rarely in Australia , 
during the time when Carboniferous animals lived in the sea—in 
the time of the lower Australian beds. They are, therefore, of 
Carboniferous age. But Glossopteris continued to live when 
already the Lower beds were deposited (including the Marine 
animals), or when the Marine animals ceased to live—when 
therefore, in fact, another epoch of life began which was charac¬ 
terised by the total absence of Marine Carboniferous animals 
and by the preponderance of plants ; and I think in this lies the 
difference between your Tipper and Lower Coal-beds, of which only 
the latter can he considered of ATarine origin, as ALarine beds, 
while the Upper ones are certainly not Alarine. beds. And from 
this reason, I thought, only those Tipper Coal strata in your 
country can be compared with our Talchir-Damiida beds, as these 
do not contain any Marine fossil at all, and the flora they contain 
hears a complete Triassic facies, so that 1 do not see any reason 
why these beds should not represent the Triassic epoch: • as 
for another epoch there is not the least indication. And now, 
judging from this, I was also convinced that your Upper beds 
cannot be Oolitic, or even Liassic (except, perhaps, some in 
Queensland), as they are equivalent to our Damuda series.” 
(MS., letter 20/2/77). 
F 
