IN the recent monograph on Broken Hill, N.S.W., by E. C. Andrews,* two independent petrological reports appear as Appendices 1 and n, by W. R. Browne and F. L. Stillwell respectively. In these considerable differences of opinion occur. Andrews contributes to some of the questions at issue, but no analytical review of the differences appears in the body of the report. Their development may invite question, and the following notes have been prepared partly in explanation and partly as a summary of some of the divergences. The soope of Browne's report extends over the whole district of Broken Hill, while Stillwell's deals with the rocks within 25 chains of the main lode. The more difficult and important rock-types occur in both areas, raising similar questions. In both cases observations extended beyond the limits of the prescribed areas. Broadly, Browne faces his problem as a study of a series of primary igneous rooks, acid and basio, whioh are intrusive into a series of sillimanite gneisses. The development of the sillimanite gneisses is regarded as belonging to an earlier period than the intrusion of the igneous rooks, while the gneissio structures of the latter are features which are incidental to their orystallization, and are not acquired subsequent to their consolidation. He finally produoes a picture in which his views of igneous injection and differentiation takes a prominent place. One direct result is the claim that three separate periods of metamorphism have oocurred in the Broken Hill area. Stillwell primarily examines the rooks as schists and gneisses since their present dominating features have been acquired during metamorphism. The effort is made to understand suoh differences as might arise from differing conditions of metamorphism upon rocks of similar and different oonstitution. The aim is to divest the rocks of those oharaoters which are due to metamorphism before approaching the questions of intrusive relatio'nships between igneous rocks andsediments.