WHILE Michell's interest in geology lasted until at least 1788, he made no further known contribution to the study of earthquakes. He must have been aware of the disastrous Calabrian earthquakes of 1783, but he would no doubt regard them as timely illustrations of his theory. The eighty years which followed 1760 were, indeed, somewhat barren as regards the progress of seismology. Among the more important contributions during this period were Dolomieu's report on the Calabrian earthquakes of 1783, Darwin's memoir on the connexion of certain volcanic phenomena in South America (1838), and the well-known chapters in Lyell's Principles of Geology (1830).

IN an earlier paper a description of certain dolomites and calc-magnesian silicate rocks of the oldest group recognized in southern Eyre Peninsula—the Hutchison series—has been given.

BEFORE we properly discuss the geology of China a few words on the geological work in that country will not be superfluous. Let us first of all ask the Chinese themselves if they, in the course of their intellectual evolution for thousands of years, have contributed anything valuable to our science. The inquiry into this point by the writer has so far been met by a negative answer. True, in ancient Chinese literature one often finds fragmentary suggestions and allegorical statements related to geology. As a typical example we may take the well-known expression “blue seas change into mulberry fields”. This sentence is much quoted by popular writers either for depicting the ephemeral state of worldly aflairs or for illustrating the slow, mighty change that persistently takes place on the earth. It is in the latter sense that it demands our attention. Again, there are a number of volumes both extremely ancient and comparatively modern treating of the drainage systems of China, and in some cases with rough indication of changes of the sea level. The descriptions of minerals like those in the “Bên-tsao-gang-mong” are certainly a record of incipient development of mineralogical study originated in China and by the Chinese; but as to the purpose, it was anything but geologic.

THE origin of chert has of late been discussed with renewed activity, especially in American scientific journals. Difference of opinion centres mainly round the question of the source of the silica; whether it is of direct inorganic origin, or the result of the solution and redeposition of organic silica. Further points at issue relate to the age and formation of the chert; whether it is an original deposit contemporaneous with the country rock, or a metasomatic replacement of the latter and therefore of later age.