![Thumbnail: [Volume 32, 1899 page 422]](/journals/rsnz/images/rsnz_32/thumbnails/rsnz_32_00_0447_0422_ac_02.gif)
Fourth Meeting: 12th December, 1899.
Mr. E. Tregear, President, in the chair.
Paper.—“On the Volcanoes of the Pacific: No. II.,” by Coleman Phillips. (Transactions, p. 188.)
Sir James Hector adversely criticized the theories advanced by Mr. Phillips, who, he said, seemed to mix up geological time and human time. He pointed out that the bursting-up of a volcanic island was no proof of general upheaval. Indeed, on the contrary, to most geologists it was proof of subsidence. He further pointed out that volcanic islands were built up, not thrust up. There were a great number of atolls in the Pacific that clearly and distinctly proved, as Darwin had pointed out, that there had been a continuous subsidence of the land on which the coral had its foundation. There were other places where the coral had risen. True, the volcanic islands were formed by accretions till they rose to such an extent that coral could grow on them; but such islands were only pustules, rising from the bottom of the sea, and they were very insignificant in comparison with the large area in which they were evolved. What they wanted in this matter was not theorising, but the
![Thumbnail: [Volume 32, 1899 page 423]](/journals/rsnz/images/rsnz_32/thumbnails/rsnz_32_00_0448_0423_ac_02.gif)
close collection, accurate analysis, and statement of facts. The recent coral-boring experiments at Funi-futi gave conclusive evidence of subsidence. The bore had been down 1,300 ft., and was not out of the dead coral yet. As coral did not live below a small depth, this was a sign that the bottom of the sea there had been gradually going down.
The President said, although the paper was very interesting, he did not think the author had brought forward sufficient evidence to prove his views regarding the volcanoes of the Pacific and his upheaval theory.
Mr. Phillips, in replying, said he had collected as many facts as he could. He had not had time to read the whole of his paper, but when it was published it would be found that it did contain facts and figures. In geological matters he would not, however, for one moment pit himself against Sir James Hector.