� Avant de donner un Ubre cours a notre imagination, il est essentiel de rassembler un plus grand nombre de fails incontestables, dont les cons�-qnences paissent se d�duire d�elles-m�mes.��Sternberg.

VOLUME I.

LONDON:

JAMES RIDOWAY, PICCADILLY.

RODERICK IMPEY MURCHISON, Esq.

PREFACE.

The importance of Organic Remains in pointing out the changes which the surface of the Globenbsp;has undergone, during periods beyond the reachnbsp;of traditionary record, has long been acknowledged.

By their assistance, we are enabled to snatch a glimpse of the early history and condition of ournbsp;Planet, and of the successive races of organizednbsp;bodies which have existed upon it. In fact, anbsp;very large part of Modern Geology is foundednbsp;upon the evidence which they afford.

Whilst this has been generally confessed, it was chiefly to the remains of animals that Naturalists, for a long time, directed their attention;nbsp;although there are many questions of deep interest in the elucidation of the History of the Globe,nbsp;which are likely to be solved by the study of thenbsp;position held in the Vegetable Kingdom, by plantsnbsp;now known only in a fossil state.

The identity of certain strata in which few animal remains are now to be discovered�thenbsp;probable condition of the atmosphere at the mostnbsp;remote periods�what gradual changes that climate may have undergone since living things firstnbsp;began to exist�whether there has been, from thenbsp;commencement, a progressive development of theirnbsp;organization�all these are questions which it isnbsp;either the peculiar province of the Botanist tonbsp;determine, or which his enquiries must, at least,nbsp;tend very much to elucidate.

Considerations of this kind have gradually forced themselves upon the minds of Geologists,nbsp;until the overcoming the difficulties that offernbsp;themselves to a strict examination of fossil vegetable remains has come to be an object of indis-pensible necessity. It is found, that neither anbsp;barren nomenclature, destitute of all attempt atnbsp;determining the relations that former species borenbsp;to those of our own sera, nor supposed identifications of species by vague external characters, nornbsp;hasty determinations of analogies by means ofnbsp;partial views of structure, are sufficient to satisfynbsp;the geological enquirer; on the contrary, it is nownbsp;distinctly seen, that nothing short of a most rigorous examination is likely to serve the ends ofnbsp;science, and that all conclusions that are notnbsp;drawn from the most precise evidence that thenbsp;nature of the subject will afford, must either benbsp;rejected, or, at least, received with the greatestnbsp;caution.

Unfortunately, Fossil Botany is beset with difficulties of a peculiar character. The materials that the enquirer has to work upon, are notnbsp;only disfigured by those accidents to which allnbsp;fossil remains are exposed in common, but theynbsp;are also those which would, in recent vegetation,nbsp;be considered of the smallest degree of importance.nbsp;There is, in most cases, an almost total want ofnbsp;that evidence by which the Botanist is guided innbsp;the examination of recent plants; and not onlynbsp;the total destruction of the parts of fructification,nbsp;and of the internal organization of the stem, butnbsp;what contributes still more to the perplexity of thenbsp;subject, a frequent separation of one part fromnbsp;another, of leaves from branches, of branches fromnbsp;trunks, and if fructification be present, of even itnbsp;from the parts of the plant on which it grew, sonbsp;that no man can tell how to collect the fragments that remain into a perfect whole. For itnbsp;must be remembered, that it is not in Botany, asnbsp;in Zoology, where a skilful anatomist has no difficulty in combining the scattered bones of a brokennbsp;skeleton. In Botany, on the contrary, the component parts of both foliage and fructification arenbsp;often so much alike in outline, which is all that thenbsp;Fossil Botanist can judge from, as to indicatenbsp;almost nothing when separated from each other,nbsp;and from the axis to which they appertain. It isnbsp;only by the various combinations of these partsnbsp;that the genera and species of plants are to be

recognized, and it is precisely these combinations that in fossils are destroyed.

Insurmountable as these obstacles may, at first sight, appear, it must be confessed that they havenbsp;yielded, in a degree that could scarcely have beennbsp;anticipated, to the persevering investigations of anbsp;few skilful observers, who, combining great acuteness with all the power that the modern state ofnbsp;Botanical science can aflfbrd them, have clearlynbsp;pointed out the possibility of reading one of thenbsp;darkest, but most interesting pages in the historynbsp;of the globe. The aera of Sternberg, Martins,nbsp;Buckland, Witham, and more especially ofnbsp;Adolphe Brongniart, will be that from whichnbsp;future Geologists will date the origin of Fossilnbsp;Botany, as a separate branch of science. Thenbsp;latter of these writers, in particular, has embodiednbsp;what is at present known of the subject in a work,nbsp;which, independently of its other merits, maynbsp;fairly lay claim to being by far the most extensive, and best arranged general treatise upon thenbsp;ancient vegetation of the world. For ourselves,nbsp;notwithstanding the many points in which we findnbsp;it necessary to differ in opinion, we have no hesitation in recommending M. Brongniart�s book tonbsp;Geologists, as the most safe guide they can follownbsp;in all that relates to Fossil Botany.

Having stated thus much, we might, on the present occasion, content ourselves with a barenbsp;explanation of the objects we have in view, in the

work that is now laid before the public, or, at least, with touching upon such points only asnbsp;concern the elucidation of the more immediatenbsp;object of our enquiry, by the discovery of thosenbsp;lost characters of species, which, no doubt, arenbsp;still locked up in our mines and rocks, whencenbsp;it is to be hoped the skilful observer will, innbsp;time, extract them. But, as the whole subjectnbsp;is one of great interest, and as it is impossible tonbsp;say to what future discoveries may lead, we begnbsp;leave to offer a few brief observations upon thenbsp;existing state of what is known or conjectured, innbsp;regard to Fossil Botany, and especially upon somenbsp;of those topics, which being of the most strikingnbsp;importance, are those with regard to which it isnbsp;more particularly desirable that exact informationnbsp;should be obtained.

That the face of the globe has successively undergone total changes, at different remote epochs, is now a fact beyond all dispute; as, also, thatnbsp;long anterior to the creation of man, this worldnbsp;was inhabited by races of animals, to which nonbsp;parallels are now to be found; and that thosenbsp;animals themselves only made their appearancenbsp;after the lapse of ages, during which no warmnbsp;blooded creatures had an existence. It has beennbsp;further remarked by Zoologists, that the animalsnbsp;which first appeared in these latitudes, werenbsp;analogous to such as now inhabit tropical regionsnbsp;exclusively ; and that it was only at a period im-

b 3

mediately antecedent to the creation of the human race, that species, similar to those of the existingnbsp;sera, began to appear in northern latitudes.

Similar peculiarities have been also found to mark the vegetation of corresponding periods.nbsp;It would hardly be credited, by persons unacquainted with the evidence upon which such factsnbsp;repose, that, in the most dreary and desolate northern regions of the present day, there once flourished groves of Tropical plants, of ConiferEe likenbsp;the Norfolk Island and Araucarian Pines, of Bananas, Tree-ferns, huge Cacti, and Palms; that thenbsp;marshes were filled with rush-like plants, fifteennbsp;or twenty feet high, the coverts with ferns like thenbsp;undergrowth of a West Indian Island, and thatnbsp;this vegetation, thus inconceivably rich and luxuriant, grew amidst an atmosphere that would havenbsp;been fatal to the animal world. Yet, nothing cannbsp;well be more certain than that such a description is far from being overcharged. In the Coalnbsp;formation, which may be considered the earliestnbsp;in which the remains of land plants have beennbsp;discovered, the Flora of England consisted ofnbsp;ferns, in amazing abundance, of large Coniferousnbsp;trees, of species resembling Lycopodiaceas, but ofnbsp;most gigantic dimensions, of vast quantities of anbsp;tribe, apparently analogous to Cacteae, or Euphor-biaceae, but, perhaps, not identical with them, ofnbsp;Palms, and other Monocotyledones; and, finally,nbsp;of numerous plants, the exact nature of which is

as yet extremely doubtful. Between two and three hundred species have been deteeted in thisnbsp;formation, of which two-thirds are ferns.

In the New Red Sandstone formation, the characters of vegetation appear to be altered by the disappearance of the gigantic Cactese, or Euphorbiacese, by a diminution of the proportion of Ferns, and bynbsp;the appearance of a few new tribes ; but so littlenbsp;is yet known of the Flora of this period, that itnbsp;is scarcely worth taking it into account.

In the Lias and Oolitic formations, an entirely new race of plants covered the earth. The proportional number of Ferns is diminished, thenbsp;gigantic Lycopodium-like and Cactoid plants ofnbsp;the Coal Measures, Calamites, and Palms, all disappear ; vegetation has no longer a character ofnbsp;excessive luxuriance, but species, undoubtedlynbsp;belonging to Cycadeee, and analogous to plants,nbsp;now natives of the Cape of Good Hope, and ofnbsp;New Holland, appear to have been common ;nbsp;Coniferous plants were still plentiful, but theynbsp;were of species that did not exist at an earliernbsp;period. Whether any other Dicotyledons, thannbsp;those of the Cycas and Pine tribes, existed at thisnbsp;time, does not clearly appear.

Up to this time, the features of vegetation were exclusively extra-European, and chiefly tropical;nbsp;but immediately succeeding the Chalk, a greatnbsp;change occurred, and a decided approach to thenbsp;Flora of modern days took place in some strikingnbsp;particulars. The Plastic Clay formation is cha-

racterized by a total absence of Cycadeae, the number of Ferns is again diminished, Coniferae increase in quantity, and, mixed with Palms andnbsp;other Tropical Monocotyledons, there grew Elms,nbsp;Willows, Poplars, Chesnuts, and Sycamores,nbsp;along with multitudes of Dicotyledonous plants,nbsp;not at present determined.

But little remains of the vegetation of succeeding periods; but this little suffices to shew, that a gradual change to the existing state of things wasnbsp;still in progress. In the Lower Fresh Water formation, one species of Palm still maintained an existence, and it would seem, that it was accompanied by a few Tropical Trees, such as Cecropia,nbsp;Sterculia, and some Malvaceae.

Finally, in the Upper Fresh Water formation, nothing has been found to distinguish the Floranbsp;from that of the present day, except in regard tonbsp;species.*

Such are the conclusions to which Geologists have arrived, from an examination of the data thatnbsp;actually exist; but it must be confessed, thatnbsp;however important the evidence already procurednbsp;may undoubtedly be considered, it is as nothingnbsp;compared with what is to be expected from futurenbsp;discoveries. At the period of the Coal formation,nbsp;when vegetation was far more copious than it is innbsp;any part of the world, at the present day, less thannbsp;300 species are known ; and M. Brongniart enu-

74 from the Lias and Oolitic beds, 34 from the lowest Tertiary Rocks, and 54 from all the superiornbsp;strata. The field of Fossil Botany may, therefore, be said to be scarcely entered, and the materials hitherto accumulated must be understoodnbsp;as bearing a very small proportion to those stillnbsp;remaining to be discovered. Hence, calculationsnbsp;of the proportion borne by one tribe to another, innbsp;a given formation, are by no means to be depended upon ; for the discovery of a very fewnbsp;additional species may, where such inconsiderablenbsp;numbers are concerned, entirely alter the result.¹nbsp;Still less can we be justified in assuming, that \nbsp;certain races of plants had no existence at anynbsp;former period ; thus, the Coniferous tribe, which ;nbsp;was, in 1823, excluded by M. Adolphe Brong- jnbsp;niart from the Coal formation, has now been de- ¹nbsp;monstrated to exist there in great abundance, and,nbsp;in some cases, in a state closely approaching thatnbsp;of modern times, (See plates 1, 2, 3, 23, 24, q/�nbsp;this work.) In further illustration of the samenbsp;remark, it may be observed, that no trace of anynbsp;glumaceous plant has been met with, even in thenbsp;latest Tertiary Rocks, although we know thatnbsp;Grasses now form a portion, and, usually, a very

This is already apparent from the additions made by Messrs. Phillips, and Bird and Young, to the Oolitic Flora ;nbsp;additions, however, of which we have not been able to availnbsp;ourselves in computing the number of the Flora, because it isnbsp;unpossible to tell what of their new species are different fromnbsp;those named, but not defined by Adolphe Brongniart.

considerable one of every Flora of the world, from New South Shetland, to Melville Island, inclusive. It may, indeed, be conjectured, that beforenbsp;the creation of herbivorous animals, Grasses andnbsp;Sedges were not required, and, therefore, are notnbsp;to be expected in any beds below the Forestnbsp;Marble, and Stonesfield Slate; but it is difficultnbsp;to conceive how the animals of the upper Tertiarynbsp;beds could have been fed, if Grasses had not thennbsp;been present.

That the temperature of this climate was, in the beginning, that of the Tropics, is legitimatelynbsp;inferred from the nature of the vegetation of thenbsp;coal measures, as compared with that of the present day; for it is found, that the large proportionnbsp;there borne by Ferns to other plants, is now anbsp;characteristic only of certain Tropical Islands.nbsp;The existence of Palms is a corroboration, although not, in itself alone, a sufficient evidence ofnbsp;the same fact; and the great dimensions of certainnbsp;plants, such as Sigillariee, the exact nature ofnbsp;which is uncertain, but which seem most analogous to Cacteae, or Euphorbiaceae, together withnbsp;the presence of Stigmaria, are all additional proofsnbsp;of a high temperature, accompanied by greatnbsp;atmospheric humidity. It is curious, nevertheless,nbsp;to remark the questionable nature of the evidence,nbsp;popularly adduced in proof of a former tropicalnbsp;climate in England ; viz. the existence of gigantic Tree Ferns and Palms in the Coal Mines.nbsp;The latter plants are found now in the South ofnbsp;Europe, and in Barbary ; and it may, therefore, be

supposed that a very moderate elevation of temperature, by no means Tropical, would enable them to grow in more northern latitudes ; and, besides, they are so uncommon in the Coal measures,nbsp;that three species only have been discovered, andnbsp;those are of very rare occurrence; while of all thenbsp;supposed species of Tree Fern Stems, enumeratednbsp;by M. Brongniart, Count Sternberg, and others,nbsp;under the name of Sigillaria, or its synonyms,nbsp;there is, in all probability, not one that can benbsp;botanically recognized as such. A single specimen of a Tree Fern Stem, in the Coal measures,nbsp;has been pointed out to us by our friend Mr.nbsp;Lonsdale ; but we know of no other instance.

Connected with this subject is a circumstance that we do not remember to have seen adverted to ;nbsp;but which, nevertheless, appears to us to form onenbsp;of the most curious problems that the philosophernbsp;has yet to solve. It is well known that numerousnbsp;remains of Mastodons were found in Melvillenbsp;Island : now, what kind of plants, fit for the foodnbsp;of such monstrous animals, could at any period,nbsp;during which the axis of the world remained in itsnbsp;present direction, have possibly grown in suchnbsp;latitudes, let the temperature have been what itnbsp;might? These animals must have had plants innbsp;abundance to live upon, in a country which, atnbsp;the present day, affords so little means of vegetation, that the largest tree is a Willow, six inchesnbsp;^igh. It has been said, that if it be allowed that,nbsp;in former ages, central fires operated conjointly

with the same solar heat as exists at the present day, that cause alone may have been sufficient tonbsp;have produced a tropical atmosphere in such countries as Great Britain, without any change in thenbsp;axis of the earth ; a postulate, which, w'e think, maynbsp;be safely granted. But it seems to have beennbsp;overlooked, that this cannot also be conceded innbsp;regard to climates like that of Melville Island;nbsp;because, supposing the axis of the earth to havenbsp;been always the same, that spot must, necessarily,nbsp;from its polar situation, have been always, for manynbsp;months in every year, in darkness ; a conditionnbsp;under which no plants can exist, at the presentnbsp;day, unless in a torpid state. But if we can judgenbsp;of the ancient vegetation of Melville Island, bynbsp;that of Baffin�s Bay, it was very like that of Greatnbsp;Britain at the time of the Coal formation ; andnbsp;this was surely a vegetation in which there wasnbsp;no torpidity, and to which the bright light, as wellnbsp;as the high temperature of the tropics, must havenbsp;been indispensible. And although the asra of thenbsp;Mastodons, in Melville Island, is much more recent than that of the Coal measures, yet we arenbsp;justified in assuming, that if the vegetation of a stillnbsp;more remote period was not calculated to developenbsp;under a long absence of light, neither was that ofnbsp;the rera of the Mastodons. Unless this difficultynbsp;can be explained, which, we think, is possible, thenbsp;state of vegetation about the north pole, in formernbsp;times, can only be accounted for by a difference innbsp;the direction of the axis of the earth ; for light is

an agent, without which no growing plants can exist, at the present day, for a single week, even innbsp;a low temperature, without suffering serious injury.

Of a still more questionable character is the theory of progressive development, as applied to thenbsp;state of vegetation in successive ages. The opinion, that in the beginning, only the most simplenbsp;forms of animals and plants were created, and that,nbsp;in succeeding periods, a gradual advance tooknbsp;place in their degree of organization, till it wasnbsp;closed by the final creation of warm blooded animals, on the one hand, and of Dicotyledonousnbsp;Trees, on the other, is one that very generallynbsp;prevails. How far this may be admissible in thenbsp;animal world, it is for Zoologists to determine;nbsp;but, in the Vegetable Kingdom, it cannot be conceded, that any satisfactory evidence has yet beennbsp;produced upon the subject; on the contrary, thenbsp;few data that exist, appear to prove exactly thenbsp;contrary. It is, therefore, very remarkable, thatnbsp;M. Adolphe Brongniart should adopt this view,nbsp;and still more so, that one of his critics, an anonymous, but evidently very acute Geologist, shouldnbsp;declare, that � the law of the progressive deve-� lopment of the classes of plants, and of anbsp;� gradual perfection of their organization, fromnbsp;� the remotest periods, till the latest geologicalnbsp;� epoch, is proved by this investigation, in asnbsp;� striking and evident a manner as has been donenbsp;� among the incomparably more numerous tribes

� of the animal kingdom^ belonging to a former � age.�* The ground of this opinion is, that nonbsp;Dicotyledonous plants existed at the period of thenbsp;Coal formation, but that vegetation was, at thatnbsp;time, composed of Cryptogamic, and Monocotyle-donous plants alone.

With reference to this subject, we would, in the first place, ask, what trace is there of the simplestnbsp;forms of Flowerless vegetation in the Coal measures, such as Fungi, Lichens, Hepaticae, ornbsp;Mosses ? to say nothing of Confervse; many ofnbsp;these would have communicated their casts asnbsp;distinctly to the matter that enveloped them, asnbsp;Ferns and Lycopodiaceas, had they existed ; butnbsp;no trace of them is found; we have, on the contrary, in their rootn, the most perfectly organizednbsp;plants of the Flowerless or Cryptogamic class,nbsp;namely. Ferns, Lycopodiaceae, and supposed Equi-setaceae. Secondly, we are told that of Monoco-tyledones, the remains consist of Palms and plantsnbsp;apparently analogous to Dracasnas, Bananas, andnbsp;the Arrow Root tribe (Marantaceae); but arenbsp;these plants of imperfect organization ? either considered per se, or when compared with the rest ofnbsp;the class to which they appertain; on the contrary, they are the most highly developed tribesnbsp;that are known in the Monocotyledonous classnbsp;of the existing aera; the simplest forms of Mono-

cotyledonous vegetation, are Grasses, Sedges, Rushes, Fluviales, and other plants related tonbsp;Aroideae, of none of which is there any the slightest trace anterior to our own aera, unless a Phyl-lites multinervis, and a few other plants in thenbsp;green-sand, and beds above the chalk, shouldnbsp;prove to belong to one of them. But, it is said,nbsp;there are no Dicotyledonous plants in the Coalnbsp;measures; we pass by the fact that has now beennbsp;so well ascertained, that Coniferous trees werenbsp;abundant at the period of the Coal formation,nbsp;because an argument might be raised about thenbsp;dignity of Coniferas, among Dicotyledonous plants;nbsp;but what were Sigillarise, or at least Stigmarise,nbsp;the latter of which must have been one of thenbsp;most common genera of the period, if we maynbsp;judge from the thousands of fragments that stillnbsp;remain; that the former were Tree Fern stems,nbsp;as is generally supposed, seems to us in thenbsp;highest degree improbable, as we hope hereafternbsp;to explain ; that the latter were not Lycopodiacere,nbsp;we trust, we have demonstrated already; thenbsp;weight of evidence seems to incline in favour ofnbsp;both having been Dicotyledonous plants, and ofnbsp;the highest degree of organization, such as Cac-teae, or Euphorbiaceae, or even Asclepiadeae; atnbsp;least, there is nothing whatever to prove the contrary. The result of this investigation is wellnbsp;worthy of attention; it shews that, so far fromnbsp;� a gradual perfection of organization having beennbsp;� going on from the remotest period, till the latest

� geological epoch,� some of the most perfect forms of each of the three great classes of thenbsp;Vegetable Kingdom were among the very firstnbsp;created; and that either the more simple plantsnbsp;of each class did not appear till our own sera, ornbsp;that no trace of them at an earlier period has beennbsp;preserved. But, supposing that Sigillarias andnbsp;Stigmarias could really be shewn to be Crypto-gamic plants, and that it could be absolutelynbsp;demonstrated, that neither Coniferse nor any othernbsp;Dicotyledonous plants existed in the first Geological age of land plants, still the theory of progressive development would be untenable, because it would be necessary to shew, that Monocotyledons are inferior in dignity, or, to use a morenbsp;intelligible expression, are less perfectly formednbsp;than Dicotyledons. So far is this from being thenbsp;case, that if the exact equality of the two classesnbsp;were not admitted, it would be a question whether Monocotyledons are not the more highlynbsp;organized of the two; whether Palms are not ofnbsp;greater dignity than Oaks, and Cerealia thannbsp;Nettles.

In looking at the general character of the successive periods of ancient vegetation, we cannot fail to be struck with the greater variety of Fossilnbsp;species in the oldest, than in the newest rocks;nbsp;and that as far as discoveries have gone, it wouldnbsp;appear, as if the number of species that have beennbsp;preserved, was in proportion to the antiquity ofnbsp;the formation. Thus, in Brongniart�s Prodromus,

omitting his Transition formation, the plants of which seem to belong rather to the Coal measures;nbsp;we find in the latter 258 species of land plantsnbsp;enumerated; in the New Red Sandstone only 19;nbsp;in the variegated Maries and Lias 22 ; in thenbsp;Oolitic series 49; in the Plastic Clay formationnbsp;35 ; in the London Clay 16 ; in the Lower Freshnbsp;Water formation 15; and in the Upper Freshnbsp;Water formation 6 species.

This is certainly not owing to any actual paucity of species in those periods of which the fewestnbsp;remains have been preserved, but to some causenbsp;which protected the more ancient remains fromnbsp;destruction by the atmosphere, and prevented the \nbsp;carbon fixed in them from being lost. Much pro- |nbsp;bability is attached to the conjecture of M. \nbsp;Adolphe Brongniart, that the atmosphere, at |nbsp;the time of primitive vegetation, was far more Inbsp;charged with carbonic acid gas than now, and thatnbsp;it was this which not only enabled gigantic speciesnbsp;to develope, at a time when there was little soil tonbsp;support them, but, also, in some measure, prevented their dead remains from being decomposednbsp;by the action of the oxygen of the atmosphere.

It is further supposed, that the excess of carbon thus assumed to have existed, which would havenbsp;been fatal to all air-breathing animals, was gradually abstracted from the atmosphere by plants,nbsp;until the air became fit, in the first place, for thenbsp;respiration of reptiles, and next, for that of Mam-malia. To the first part of this proposition there

Dismissing this part of our subject, we will next explain what the objects are of the work we havenbsp;now commenced. We propose, in the first place,nbsp;to combine, in a single point, figures of all thenbsp;Fossil plants that have been discovered in thenbsp;rocks of this country. The utility of such a worknbsp;for recent plants, is attested by the English Botany of Mr. Sowerby; and, no doubt, a similarnbsp;publication upon our Fossil Flora will become, innbsp;time, a great mass of facts, to which Geologistsnbsp;will find it much more convenient to refer, than ifnbsp;the same information were scattered through manynbsp;distinct publications. A similar object is, indeed,nbsp;pursuing in France by M. Adolphe Brongniart,nbsp;of whose Histoire des V�g�taux Fossiles it is difficult to speak too highly; but we' confess thatnbsp;this, far from discouraging us in our own attempt,nbsp;acts rather as a stimulus to greater exertion.nbsp;Besides, we are not ashamed to confess that wenbsp;have national feeling enough to make us anxiousnbsp;that the elucidation of every thing that relates tonbsp;England, should come from the hands of Englishmen ; and that we should not be subject to thenbsp;disgrace of being obliged to send our nativenbsp;Fossils to another country for examination, fromnbsp;want of the skill to determine them ourselves.nbsp;The richness of Great Britain, in the Fossil remains of Vegetables, is well known to everynbsp;Geologist; and the facilities of studying them are

so great in the extensive excavations of our Coal Mines, that it is in this country more especiallynbsp;that information should be looked for upon thenbsp;subject.

In another point of view, we think a work of this kind likely to be of general utility. It is anbsp;very remarkable fact, that, informer ages, the rangenbsp;of the species of plants was far more extensivenbsp;than at the present day. If we compare thenbsp;Floras of modern Europe and America, we find,nbsp;that they differ in the greater part of their species,nbsp;so that the general characters of the vegetation ofnbsp;the two countries are now essentially unlike. Butnbsp;M. Adolphe Brongniart assures us, that the plantsnbsp;of the North American Coal Mines are, for thenbsp;most part, perfectly identical with those ofnbsp;Europe, and that they all belong to the samenbsp;genera ; the same is stated of Fossils, fromnbsp;Greenland, and from Baffin�s Bay ; that ours arenbsp;very much the same as those of the rest ofnbsp;Europe, is also certain. A Fossil Flora of Greatnbsp;Britain applies, then, not only to the rest ofnbsp;Europe, as might have been expected, but also tonbsp;very distant countries.

In the third place, we hope, that a work appearing periodically, may become the focus,nbsp;as it were, of all the knowledge that will benbsp;gradually acquired in regard to this importantnbsp;subject: that it will keep the enquiry in sight ofnbsp;those, who, from their local position, will be able,nbsp;niost powerfully, to aid it by the examination of

the remains within their reach ; but who may be the least acquainted with the nature of the information that is wanted, and with the progressnbsp;that the science is making elsewhere. In ordernbsp;to render it as generally useful as our means willnbsp;allow us, we have added to these introductorynbsp;remarks a concise arrangement of such genera ofnbsp;Fossil plants as are at present admitted, in which,nbsp;perhaps, there is not much that is original, for it isnbsp;necessarily based upon the work of M. Brongniart,nbsp;so often already alluded to, but which serves tonbsp;explain what our own views of the subject are, atnbsp;the present moment, and contains such published'nbsp;additions as have been made since 1828. To eachnbsp;succeeding volume, we propose to prefix some,nbsp;similar table, either applied to genera or to species,nbsp;corrected and made up to the time of its publication, by which the gradual advance of this branchnbsp;of Geology will be made apparent; and our worknbsp;will constantly be upon a level with the existingnbsp;state of science. We further propose to introduce,nbsp;occasionally, lists, or even detailed accounts of thenbsp;species found in particular localities, or formations ; so that, in this way, the, local discoveriesnbsp;that may from time to time be made, will be constantly brought before the world. Many changesnbsp;may be expected in a nomenclature, which is, atnbsp;present, provisional to a great extent, and perhaps total alterations may take place in ournbsp;ideas, respecting many fossils that have long beennbsp;known. The biennial republication, now alluded

to¹, will be an effectual means of remedying the inconveniences that would otherwise attend suchnbsp;changes.

It must always be remarked, that, in this study, every one is a mere beginner ; that he whonbsp;has pursued it the longest, is still but upon thenbsp;very threshold of the science, and that we havenbsp;only just begun to clear away the impedimentsnbsp;that accident and ages have accumulated in ournbsp;path. It is no wonder that errors should be committed in such a pursuit. So perfectly hopeless isnbsp;it to escape them, that Botanists have, probably,nbsp;been deterred from engaging in the enquiry, asnbsp;much by a dread of the risk to which their scientific reputation must necessarily be exposed, as bynbsp;the difficulty of the task itself. For ourselves,nbsp;however, we have no other object than the promotion of science, as far as our humble means willnbsp;permit. We willingly place aside all considerations of personal loss of reputation, and we trustnbsp;ourselves, if not fearlessly, at least cheerfully to thenbsp;importance of our cause, to the aid and protectionnbsp;of those who can appreciate the peculiar nature ofnbsp;the enquiry; and to the persuasion, that unless,nbsp;not one Botanist, but many, will lend their assistance to its elucidation, Geology must for evernbsp;remain deprived of the evidence to be afforded by

As eight quarterly numbers of this work form a volume, the tabbies of genera or species will necessarily appear every twonbsp;years.

It will not be foreign to the object of these introductory observations, if we next proceed tonbsp;explain, Firstly, in what way the state of thenbsp;Fossil remains of plants renders it almost indis-pensible, that any investigation of their originalnbsp;structure should be conducted; and Secondly,nbsp;what the chief points are, to which the attentionnbsp;of collectors should, more especially, be directed.

When a Botanist proceeds to the examination of a recent specimen of an unknown plant, henbsp;directs his view to certain peculiarities in thenbsp;organs, both of fructification and vegetation, takennbsp;together; and from what he finds to be their structure, he judges of the class, order, or genus tonbsp;which it belongs. But as in fossil plants neithernbsp;calyx, corolla, stamens, nor pistillum, are to benbsp;recognized, an opinion has to be formed, not fromnbsp;the consideration of a complex combination ofnbsp;characters, in which the loss of one organ is compensated for by the peculiarities of those whichnbsp;remain : but from a few isolated and very imperfect data exclusively afforded by the remains ofnbsp;the organs of vegetation. In the latter, unfortunately, the modes of organization are not sufficiently varied, to enable us to draw any precisenbsp;conclusions from their examination; but, on thenbsp;contrary, we are often obliged to be satisfied withnbsp;a general idea only of the nature of the object of

our enquiry. This is, perhaps, not attended with so much practical inconvenience as might be expected, in a Geological point of view, because thenbsp;end of science will be sufficiently answered, if wenbsp;can, in the first place, determine the general characters and affinities of the plants of former rnras,nbsp;and, in the second, so exactly classify their fossilnbsp;remains, as to be able to recognize them, withnbsp;such precision, as to render them available for thenbsp;identification of strata.

It usually happens that the only parts which are capable of being examined in a fossil state,nbsp;are the internal structure of the stem, and itsnbsp;external surface; together with the position, division, outline, and veining of the leaves. Of thesenbsp;it has never yet happened that any one specimennbsp;has afforded the whole; more frequently it is onlynbsp;two or three of those characters that the Botanistnbsp;can employ.

Suppose that he has a fragment of the fossil trunk of some unknown tree; if no trace can benbsp;discovered of its exact anatomical structure, it maynbsp;be possible, at least, to ascertain whether its woodnbsp;was deposited in concentric zones, or in a confusednbsp;manner; in the former case, it would have beennbsp;Dicotyledonous, or Exogenous ; in the latter, Mo-nocotyledonous, or Endogenous; if a transversenbsp;section should shew the remains of sinuous unconnected layers, resembling arcs with their endsnbsp;directed outwards, of a solid homogeneous character, and imbedded among some softer substance, then it may be considered certain that

such a stem belonged to some arborescent Fern. But if the state of a fossil stem will admit of annbsp;anatomical examination, it is always desirablenbsp;that it should be instituted with the assistance ofnbsp;the microscope. Mr. Witham was the first to makenbsp;known the possibility of this being done ; and if itnbsp;should prove that the condition of fossil remainsnbsp;is in general favourable to this kind of examination, more light is likely to be thrown upon thenbsp;extinct Flora than could be otherwise anticipated.nbsp;If the tissue of a stem should be found entirelynbsp;cellular, and it could be satisfactorily made out,nbsp;that no vascular tissue whatever was combinednbsp;with it, the specimen would, in all probability,nbsp;have belonged to that division of the Vegetablenbsp;Kingdom, which, being propagated without thenbsp;agency of sexes, is by Botanists called Crypto-gamia; a specimen of this kind should, however,nbsp;be examined with the most rigorous accuracy ;nbsp;because it might have been a succulent portionnbsp;of some Dicotyledonous tree, in which the vascular system was so scattered among cellular substances as to be scarcely discernible. If thenbsp;tissue should have consisted of tubes placed parallel with each other, without any trace of raysnbsp;passing from the centre to the circumference, itnbsp;would have been Endogenous, even if therenbsp;should be an appearance of concentric circlesnbsp;in the wood; but if any trace whatever can benbsp;discovered of tissue, crossing the longitudinalnbsp;tubes at right angles, from the centre to the circumference, then such a specimen would have

been Exogenous, whether concentric circles can be made out or not; for such an arrangement ofnbsp;tissue would indicate the presence of medullarynbsp;rays, which are the most certain sign of a Dicotyledonous plant. If, in a specimen having thesenbsp;rays, the longitudinal tubes are all of the samenbsp;size, a circumstance obvious upon the inspectionnbsp;of a tranverse section, the plant will have beennbsp;either Coniferous or Cycadeous; but, if amongnbsp;the smaller tubes, which, in fact, are woody fibres,nbsp;some larger ones are interspersed in a definite manner ; it would, in that case, have belonged to somenbsp;other tribe of Dicotyledons. It is indispensible thatnbsp;the arrangement of the larger tubes should havenbsp;been definite, for appearances of the same kindnbsp;exist in much Coniferous wood ; but, in the latter,nbsp;they are scattered in an indefinite manner amongnbsp;the smaller tubes, and are not vessels, but cylindrical cavities for the collection of the resinous secretion peculiar to the Fir tribe. Again, if the walls ofnbsp;the longitudinal tubes of any fossil specimen arenbsp;found to exhibit appearances of little warts, growing from their sides, such a specimen had certainly belonged to some Coniferous or Cycadeousnbsp;plant, no other tribes whatever possessing such anbsp;structure at the present day. Finally, if a tracenbsp;of pith can be discovered, that circumstance alonenbsp;will be a proof of the plant having been Dicotyledonous, because all other classes are destitute ofnbsp;that central cellular column ; it must, however, al-ways be borne in mind, that absence of pith does

not prove that a specimen is not Dicotyledonous, because the roots of those plants have no pith.

If a stem is in such a state that nothing can be determined respecting its anatomy, we must thennbsp;proceed to judge of it by another set of characters.nbsp;In the first place, it should be enquired whethernbsp;it had a distinctly separable bark, or a corticalnbsp;integument that differed in its organization fromnbsp;the wood, without being separable from it; ornbsp;neither the one nor the other. In the first instance,nbsp;it would have been Dicotyledonous; in the second,nbsp;Monocotyledonous; in the third, Acotyledonous ornbsp;Cryptogamic, supposing that it had been a trunknbsp;which many successive years had contributed tonbsp;form. The distinction, as applied to the two latternbsp;classes, is not, however, so positive as could benbsp;wished, because Tree Ferns have a cortical integument ; but they are easily known by the longnbsp;ragged scars left by their leaves ; and no othernbsp;Cryptogamic plants possess the character of having a spurious bark. For this reason, it is doubtful whether Catamites is related to Equisetacem ;nbsp;and if we could be sure that the coaly matter foundnbsp;enveloping that genus, was really the remains ofnbsp;a cortical integument, there would be no doubt ofnbsp;its affinity being of a different kind, as, for instance,nbsp;with Juncus. But here is a difficulty; how arenbsp;we to be sure, that this coaly matter is a part ofnbsp;the original organization of the stem, and that itnbsp;is not an independent carbonaceous formation?nbsp;Another object of enquiry will be, whether the

stem was articulated (as indicated by tumid nodi) or not; and, if the former, whether it had thenbsp;property of disarticulating; these circumstancesnbsp;are not of much positive value in pointing outnbsp;affinities ; but they afford negative evidence, thatnbsp;must, on no account, be overlooked; for example,nbsp;if this had been properly considered in regard tonbsp;Calamites, although the affinity of that genus mightnbsp;not have been discovered, yet it never could havenbsp;been referred either to Palms or Bambusas, which,nbsp;in no instance, ever disarticulate. A third, andnbsp;very important kind of evidence, is to be collectednbsp;from the scars left upon stems by the fall of leaves.nbsp;Although these will neither inform us of thenbsp;shape, or other characters of the leaves themselves, yet they indicate, with precision, their position, the form of their base, and sometimes,nbsp;also, their probable direction; we can tell, whethernbsp;they were opposite or verticillate, alternate or spirally disposed, deciduous or persistent, and imbricated or remote; all characters of great use, asnbsp;means of discrimination, and as often affordingnbsp;important negative evidence upon doubtful points.nbsp;The Geologist will, however, be careful not tonbsp;ascribe too much value to modifications in thenbsp;origin of leaves, and, in particular, to the spiralnbsp;mode, which forms so striking a feature in manynbsp;Fossil remains; he will bear in mind that thenbsp;latter is theoretically the normal mode in whichnbsp;�ill leaves originate, and that other modes arenbsp;ffiore or less obvious modifications of it; and

finally, he will consider, that if he is not familiar with instances of it in recent plants, it is becausenbsp;the lines of spires are broken by the leaves thatnbsp;are interposed between them and the eye. Henbsp;will, possibly, only remember, that the leaves ofnbsp;Firs, the fruit of the Pine Apple, and the foliagenbsp;of the Screw Pine, (Pandanus) are arranged uponnbsp;this plan; but if he draws a line from base tonbsp;base of the leaves of any alternate-leaved plant,nbsp;always proceeding in the same direction, he willnbsp;find, that that line will describe a spire round thenbsp;axis from which the leaves originate; so that anbsp;spiral appearance will be apparent in proportionnbsp;as leaves are approximated.

In judging of the identity of fossil stems, that are characterized by their external appearance,nbsp;care must be taken not to distinguish as differentnbsp;species those stems that have still their corticalnbsp;integument upon them, from such as have lost it.nbsp;In these two cases, the appearance of scars willnbsp;be different; those of the former being morenbsp;rounded, broader, and, probably, more deeply furrowed than the latter; for the one is a real scar,nbsp;shewing the outline of the base of the leaf, whilenbsp;the latter is solely caused by the passage ofnbsp;bundles of vessels out of the stem into the petiolenbsp;of the leaf.

The manner in which stems branch, is sometimes well deserving consideration ; where no trace of leaves can be found, their position may possibly be indicated by the origin of branches; for

the latter being always axillary to the leaves, can only originate as they do ; but, unfortunately, thenbsp;value of this fact is often reduced to nothing, bynbsp;the appearance of branches from the axillae of anbsp;few leaves only, in distant parts of the stem.

The most useful character to be thus derived, is when the branches regularly bifurcate; for thisnbsp;kind of ramification is a strong symptom of anbsp;cryptogamic plant, especially if accompanied bynbsp;an imbricated foliage.

In Leaves we can rarely recognize, in a fossil state, more than their mode oi venation, division,nbsp;arrangement, and outline, to which are sometimesnbsp;added their texture and surface. All these are ofnbsp;importance, but in unequal degrees. Of thenbsp;highest value is the evidence afforded by the distribution of the veins, taken together with the modenbsp;of division of a leaf. If the veins are all parallel,nbsp;unbranched, or only connected by little transversenbsp;bars, and the leaves undivided, the plant was probably Monocotyledonous ; and if the veins ofnbsp;such a leaf, instead of running side by side fromnbsp;the base to the apex, diverge from the midrib, andnbsp;lose themselves in the margin, forming a closenbsp;series of double curves; the plant was certainlynbsp;analogous to what are now called Scitamineae,nbsp;Marantaceae, and Musaceae: but supposing thatnbsp;the parallel arrangement of simple veins is combined with a pinnated foliage, then the plantnbsp;Would probably have belonged to Cycadeae, thatnbsp;curious tribe that stands on the very limits of

Monocotyledons, and Dicotyledons, and of Flowering and Flowerless plants. By such characters as these, however, there is no means of distinguishing certain Palms, if in a Fossil state,nbsp;from Cycadese.

If veins are all of equal thickness, and dichotomous, we have an indication of the Fern tribe, which is seldom deceptive. Nevertheless, it mustnbsp;be remembered that the flabelliform leaves, bothnbsp;of Monocotyledons and Dicotyledons, have occasionally this kind of venation. Even if the veinsnbsp;are not dichotomous, if they are all of nearly equalnbsp;thickness and very fine, or divided in a very simple manner, it is probable that they indicate thenbsp;Fern Tribe, whether simple, as in the fossil genus,nbsp;Tasniopteris; or reticulated, as in the modernnbsp;genus Meniscium. If veins are of obviously unequal thickness, and so branched as to resemblenbsp;the meshes of a net, we have a sign of Dicotyledonous structure that seldom misleads us.nbsp;Finally, if no veins at all are to be found, an opinion must be formed, not from their absence, butnbsp;from other circumstances. If the leaves are small,nbsp;their absence may be due to incomplete development ; but if the leaves are large and irregularlynbsp;divided, we may have an indication of some kindnbsp;of Marine plant. When leaves are small, andnbsp;densely imbricated, they are generally considered,nbsp;by Fossil Botanists, to belong to either Lycopo-diaceae, or Coniferae ; and there is so little to distinguish these families, in a fossil state, that there

is scarcely any means of demonstrating to which such genera, as Lycopodites, Lepidodendron, Juni-perites, Taxites, See. and the like, actually belong.

It would be easy to extend these observations much further, but to dwell at length upon thisnbsp;branch of the subject, would carry us far beyond the limits of a preface. We will, therefore,nbsp;bring our remarks to a conclusion, by calling attention to some of those points, to the elucidationnbsp;of which, it is most to be wished, that Geologists,nbsp;who have opportunities of collecting fossil plants,nbsp;would apply themselves. In the first place, evidence is wanted as to the plants to which thenbsp;cones called Lepidostrobi, the leaves called Le-pidophylla, and the fruit named Cardiocarpa, respectively appertain ; are they all portions of species of the same genus, or, as seems more probable, is not Cardiocarpon a part of a plant of anbsp;totally different affinity ? Secondly, what werenbsp;the leaves of Sigillaria, and of Stigmaria? Ofnbsp;the latter, something is known; but the leaves arenbsp;always so crushed, that no notion can be formednbsp;of their exact nature. Mr. Steinhauer says, he hasnbsp;traced them to the length of 20 feet! In the thirdnbsp;place, to determine the leaves of any of the fossilnbsp;stems, that at present are only known in the latternbsp;state, such as Sternbergia, Bucklandia, Cyca-deoidea, Caulopteris, Exogenites, and Endogenites,nbsp;Would be to supply a great desideratum. Again,nbsp;what was the real nature of the stem of Catamites;nbsp;�Was it an annual shoot proceeding from a peren-

nial horizontal rhizoma, like that of Juncus, amp;c. ? Had it any leaves^ and if so, were they of thenbsp;nature of those figured in this work, as probablynbsp;belonging to Calamites nodosus, but considerednbsp;by Sternberg and Brongniart a distinct genus,nbsp;which they call Volkmannia ? Another verynbsp;interesting object of enquiry is into the anatomicalnbsp;structure of Lepidodendron, for the sake of settlingnbsp;whether that extensive fossil genus belonged tonbsp;Coniferse, or to Lycopodiaceae, or to neither. Wenbsp;know nothing of the leaves belonging to the fossilnbsp;fruits, called Anomocarpon, Musocarpon, amp;c. or ofnbsp;the fruit of Cycadeoidea, Annularia, Asterophyl-lites, and many others. Now these are difficultiesnbsp;that probably may be removed by diligent researchnbsp;among the beds in which such fossils occur; andnbsp;which, if removed, would contribute much morenbsp;to fixing the science upon a solid basis, than thenbsp;discovery of species not before described. For allnbsp;such information as our friends may communicatenbsp;upon these or similar subjects, we shall alwaysnbsp;make our grateful acknowledgments; and we trust,nbsp;that when the time shall arrive for our layingnbsp;before the world a further statement of the progress that Fossil Botany shall have made, wenbsp;shall be able to announce that light has beennbsp;thrown upon a part, at least, of those great questions, which are at present involved in great obscurity.

GENERA OF FOSSIL PLANTS.

N.15. Those geneva marked (*) are recent; the remmnder are only known in a fossil state. Characters are assigned to the latter chiefly.

Class 1. VASC CLARES; or FLOWERING PLANTS. Subclass 1. EXOGENE ; or DICOTYLEDONS.

Genus 2 a. Phaseolites, Leaves compound, unequally pinnate ; leaflets entire, disarticulating, with nearly equal reticulated veins.

\ The reader who is anxious for information regarding the characters of fliis, and the succeeding Natural Orders, is referred to the Introductionnbsp;to the Natural System of Botany.

One species�in the Lignite of Tertiary formations. One species ?�in the Lower freshwater formation.

? Genus 11. Stigmaria. (Variolaria Sternb. Mamraillaria Ad. Br, Ticoidites Artis.) Stem originally succulent ; marked externally by roundish tubercles,nbsp;surrounded by a hollow, and arranged in a direction more or less spiral; having internally a distinct woody axis, which communicates with thenbsp;tubercles by woody processes. Leaves arisingnbsp;from the tubercles, succulent, entire, and veinless,nbsp;except in the centre, where there is some trace ofnbsp;a midrib.

Genus 13. Pinites. Axis composed of pith, wood in concentric circles, bark, and medullary rays, but with no vessels. Walls of the woody fibrenbsp;reticulated.

Genus 14. Pence. Axis composed of pith, wood in concentric circles, bark, and medullary rays, but with no vessels. Walls of the woody fibrenbsp;marked with oblong deciduous areolae, having anbsp;circle in their middle.

the same sheath. Cones composed of imbricated scales, which are enlarged at their apex into anbsp;rhomboidal disk. Ad. Br.

in a double spire, often unequal in length, and distichous. Cones composed of scales, withoutnbsp;a rhomboidal disk. Ad. Br.

Genus 17. Taxites. Leaves solitary, supported on a short petiole, articulated, and inserted in asingle spire,nbsp;not very dense, distichous. Ad. Br.

Genus 19. Voltzia. Branches pinnated. Leaves inserted all round the branches, sessile, slightly decurrent or dilated at the base, and almost conical ; often distichous. Fruit forming spikes ornbsp;loose cones, composed of distant imbricatednbsp;d 2

Genus 20. Juniperites. Branches arranged irregularly. Leaves short, obtuse, inserted by a broad base, opposite,nbsp;decussate, and arranged in four rows. Ad. Br.

Genus 2T. Ctipressites. Branches arranged irregularly. Leaves inserted spirally, in six or seven rows, sessile,nbsp;enlarged at their base. Fruit consisting of peltate scales, marked with a conical protuberancenbsp;in their centre. Ad. Br.

upon the same plane. Leaves opposite, decussate, in four rows. Fruit composed of a small number of imbricated scales, terminated by anbsp;disk, which has near its upper end a more or lessnbsp;acute, and sometimes recurved point. Ad. Br.

Genus 24. Brachyphyllum. Branches pinnated, disposed on the same plane without regularity. Leaves verynbsp;short, conical, almost like tubercles, arrangednbsp;spirally. Ad. Br.

Genus 25. Sphenophyllum. (Rotularia Sternb.) Branches deeply furrowed. Leaves verticillate, wedge-shaped, with dichotomous veins.

Cycadites. Leaves pinnated ; leaflets linear, entire, adhering by their whole base, having a single thick midrib ; no secondary veins. Ad. Br.

xir

toothed at their extremity, pointed, sometimes enlarged and auricled as it were at their base,nbsp;attached only by the midrib, which is oftennbsp;thickened; veins fine, equal, all parallel, ornbsp;scarcely diverging. Ad. Br.

Lifteen species�in the Lias and Oolitic formation. One species�(bed unknown.)

Genus 28. Pterophyllum. Leaves pinnated ; leaflets almost equally broad each way, inserted by the wholenbsp;of their base, truncated at the summit; veinsnbsp;fine, equal, simple, but little marked, all parallel. Ad. Br.

Three species�in the Variegated marie of the Lias. Three species�in the Sandstone of the Lias.

Genus 29. Nikonia. Leaves pinnated; leaflets approximated, oblong, more or less elongated, rounded at thenbsp;summit, adhering to the rachis by the whole ofnbsp;their base, with parallel veins, some of whichnbsp;are much more strongly marked than others.nbsp;Ad. Br.

Cycadeoidea. Buckland. (Mantellia Ad. Brong.) Stem roundish or oblong, covered with denselynbsp;imbricated scales, which are scarred at their apex,nbsp;I�wo species�in the Portland stone.

1 Genus 31. Pkyllotlieca. Stem simple, straight, articulated, surrounded at equal distances by sheaths, having long linear leaves, which have no distinctnbsp;midrib.

Genus 32. Annularia. (Bornia/S#er�amp;.) Stem slender, articulated, with opposite branches springing from above the leaves. Leaves verticillate, flat, usuallynbsp;obtuse, with a single midrib, united at their base,nbsp;of unequal length. Ad. Br.

Genus 33. Asterophyllites. (Bornia Sternb. Bruckmannia Sternb.) Stem scarcely tumid at the articula-d 3

tions,branched. Leavesverticillate,linear,acute, with a single midrib, quite distinct at their base.nbsp;(Fruit a one seeded? ovate, compressed nucule,nbsp;bordered by a membranous wing, and emarginatenbsp;at the apex. Ad. Br.)

Obs. This is probably an extremely heterogeneous assemblage, comprehending nearly all fossils with narrow veinless verticillate leaves, that are not united in a cup at their base.

Genus 34. Bechera. Stem branched, jointed, tumid at the ar tic ulations, deeply and widely furrowed. Leavesnbsp;verticillate, very narrow, acute, ribless ?

Genus 35. CannophyHites, Leaves simple, entire, traversed by a very strong midrib; veins oblique, simple,nbsp;parallel, all of equal size. Ad. Br.

One species�in a bed of coal, supposed to be more recent than the old coal formation.

? Genus 36. Bucklandia. Stem covered by reticulated fibres, giving rise to (imbricated) leaves which are notnbsp;amplexicaul, and the petioles of which are distinct to their base. Ad, Br.

Obs. Dr. Buckland suggests the possibility of this being the amentum of a Cycadeous plant. G. trans. vol. 2. n, s.nbsp;p. 400.

Genus 37. Clathraria. Stem composed of an axis, the surface of which is covered by reticulated fibres, and of a bark formed by the complete union ofnbsp;the bases of petioles, whose insertion is rhom-boidal. Ad, Br,

? Genus 38. Convallarites. Leaves verticillate, linear, with parallel slightly marked veins. Stem straight,nbsp;or curved. Ad. Br.

Smilacites. Leaves heartshaped or hastate, with a well-defined midrib, and two or three secondary ribs on each side, parallel to the edge of thenbsp;leaf. Veins reticulated. Ad. Br.

Palmacites. Stems cylindrical, simple, covered by the bases of petiolated leaves; petioles dilated, and amplexicaul. Ad. Br.

Flabellaria. Leaves petiolated, flabelliform, divided into linear lobes, plaited at their base. Ad. Br.

One species�in the Lower freshwater formation. One species�in the London clay formation.

Phcenicites. Leaves petiolated, pinnated ; leaflets linear, united by pairs at the base, their veinsnbsp;fine, and little marked.

Naggerathia. Leaves petiolated, pinnated; leaflets obovate, nearly cuneiform, applied against thenbsp;edges of the petiole, toothed towards their apex,nbsp;with fine diverging veins. Ad. Br.

Genus 45. Zeugophyllites. Leaves petiolated, pinnated ; leaflets opposite, oblong or oval, entire, with a few strongly marked ribs, confluent at the base andnbsp;summit, all of equal thickness. Ad. lir.

Zosterites. Leaves oblong or linear, marked with a small number of equal veins, which are at anbsp;marked distance from each other, and are notnbsp;connected by transverse veins. Ad. Sr.

Caulinites. (Amphytoites Sesm.) Stem branched, bearing semi-annular, or nearly annular scars ofnbsp;leaves, alternate in two opposite rows, markednbsp;with little equal dots. Ad. Br.

Genus 49. Endogenites. This comprehends all fossil endogenous stems that do not belong to any of the genera characterized separately. It is a merenbsp;provisional assemblage of objects to be furthernbsp;examined.

Genus 51. Sternhenjia. (Columnaria Sternb.) Stem taper, slender, naked, cylindrical,terminating in a cone �nbsp;marked by transverse furrows, but with no articulations. Slight remains of a fleshy corticalnbsp;integument.

Genus 52. Poacites. All Monocotyledonous leaves, the veins of which are parallel, simple, of equal thickness,nbsp;and not connected by transverse bars.

Genus 53. Phyllites. (Potamophyllites4d.Br.) All Mo-nocotyledonous leaves, the veins of nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,

confluent at the base and apex, and connected oy transverse bars, or secondary veins.

pbS; M. Ad. Brongniart now refers this fossil to Fluviales; but as It agrees as well with species of Alismacem and Butoinese,nbsp;�We prefer placing it here, under the name originally given it.

Plants which cannot be with certainty

TO EITHER THE MONOCOTYLEDONOUS, OR

Genu nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;classes.

R� 58. jEthophyllum. Stem simple. Leaves alternate, linear, ribless, not sheathing, having at the basenbsp;two smaller linear leaflets. (Stipules ?) Inflorescence spiked ; spikes ovate. Plowers numerous, with a sub-cylindrical tube, or inferior ovarium, and a bilabiate ? perianthium with subulate segments.

Ob nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;species�in the New red sandstone.

its cha G�^��Suiart refers this to Monocotyledons; but if have been rightly determined, it can scarcely

S to that Natural Class.

'*S 59. Echinostachys. Inflorescence an oblong spike, beset on all sides with sessile, contiguous, sub-conical flowers, or fruits. Ad. Br.

One species�in the New red sandstone.

Obs. M. Brongniart refers this, also, to Monocotyledons, and suggests the possibility of its afSnity to Sparganium ; butnbsp;as there is nothing to show that it is not some Dicotyledonousnbsp;fruit, such as Datura Stramonium, it will be better to wait fornbsp;further information before its place is determined on.

Genus 60. PalcBoxyris. Inflorescence a terminal fusiform spike, with appressed closely imbricated scales ;nbsp;its external portion, where it is not covered bynbsp;scales, rhomboidal, concave in the middle. Ad. Br.

Obs. One would scarcely think of doubting whether this is Monocotyledonous, so closely does it approach the recent genusnbsp;Xyris in external characters, if it were not for a tuft of filaments, noticed by M. Brongniart, as apparently proceedingnbsp;from its apex. This circumstance is at variance with Xyris,nbsp;and gives rise to a suspicion that it may, perhaps, be somenbsp;Composita, with a fusiform involucrura.

articulated, surrounded by cylindrical sheaths which are regularly tooth-letted, and pressednbsp;close to the stem. Ad, Br.

? Genus 62. Calamites. Stems jointed, regularly and closely furrowed, hollow, divided internally at the articulations by a transverse diaphragm, coverednbsp;with a thick cortical integument. (? Leavesnbsp;verticillate, very narrow, numerous, and simple.)

Filices.

Pachypteris. Leaves pinnated, or bipinnated ; leaflets entire, coriaceous, ribless, or one-ribbed,nbsp;contracted at the base, but not adherent to thenbsp;midrib, ^d. Br.

Two species�in the inferior beds of the Oolitic formation.

^phenopteris. Leaves bi-tripinnatifid; leaflets contracted at tbe base, not adherent to the rachis, lobed ; the lower lobes largest, diverging, some-quot;'hat palmate; veins bipinnate, radiating as itnbsp;tvere from the base. Ad. Br.

One species�in the Sand below the chalk.

Two species�in the New red sandstone.

Tive species�in the Oolitic formation.

Twenty-eight species�in the Coal formation.

Cyclopteris. Leaves simple, entire, somewhat orbicular ; veins numerous, radiating from the base, dichotomous, equal; midrib wanting. Ad. Br.

Four species�in the Coal formation.

Gne species�in tbe Transition rocks.

Gne species�in the Oolitic formation.

Glossopteris. Leaves simple, entire, somewhat lanceolate, narrowing gradually to the base, with a thick vanishing midrib: veins oblique, curved,nbsp;equal, frequently dichotomous, or sometimesnbsp;anastomising and reticulated at the base. Ad. Br.

species�in the Oolitic formation, species�in the Lias.

Neuropteris. Leaves bipinnate, or rarely pinnate ; leaflets usually somewhat cordate at the base,nbsp;neither adhering to each other, nor to the rachis,nbsp;by their whole base, only by the middle portionnbsp;of it; midrib vanishing at the apex; veins oblique, curved, very fine, dichotomous--Fruc

tification ; sori lanceolate, even, (covered with an indusinm,) arising from the veins of the apex ofnbsp;the leaflets, and often placed in the bifurcations.nbsp;Ad. Br.

Twenty-four species�in the Coal formation.

Three species�in the New red sandstone.

One species�in the Anthracite of Savoy.

One species�in the Muschelkalk.

Odontopteris. Leaves bipinnated ; leaflet, membranous, very thin, adhering by all their base to the rachis, with no, or almost no midrib ; veinsnbsp;equal, simple, or forked, very fine, most of themnbsp;springing from the rachis. Ad. Br.

Five species�in the Coal formation.

Anomopteris. Leaves pinnated ; leaflets linear, entire, somewhat plaited transversely at thenbsp;veins, having a midrib; veins simple, perpendicular, curved. Fructification arising from thenbsp;veins, uncertain as to form; perhaps dot-like, andnbsp;inserted in the middle of the veins ; or, perhaps,nbsp;linear, attached to the whole of a vein, naked (asnbsp;in Meniscia) or covered by an indusium, opening inwardly. Ad. Br.

One species�in the New red sandstone.

Tccniopteris. Leaves simple, entire, with a stiff thick midrib; veins perpendicular, simple, ornbsp;forked at the base. Fructification, dot-like.nbsp;Ad. Br.

Three species�in the Lias and Oolitic formations.

Pecopteris, Leaf once, twice, or thrice pinnate ; leaflets adhering by their base to the rachis, ornbsp;occasionally distinct; midrib running quitenbsp;through the leaflet; veins almost perpendicularnbsp;to the midrib, simple, or once or twice dichotomous. Ad. Br.

Sixty species �in the Coal formation.

Ten species�in the Oolitic formation.

Two species�in the Lias.

One species�in the beds above the Chalk.

Lonchopteris. Leaf many times pinnatifid ; leaflets more or less connate at the base, having a midrib ; veins reticulated. Ad. Br.

Two species�in the Coal formation.

One species�in the Greensand formation.

Clathropteris. Leaf deeply pinnatifid; leaflets having a very strong complete midrib; veins numerous and simple, parallel, almost perpendicularnbsp;to the midrib, united by transverse veins, whichnbsp;form a net-work of square meshes upon the leaf.nbsp;Ad. Br.

One species�in the Lias.

Ad. Br. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.

One species-in the Coal formatron.

N.B. It has become necessary to ^��wgj.a.gtems genus, in consequence of all the supP� �.(jnaniart, and othe ,nbsp;described by Count Sternberg,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;uh^tidolepis� dsm, �

being such, as we ba've elsewhere . i -nrobably of which the nature cannot be dou � Yjaracterized by t enbsp;species included in some of the c thenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;sana-

Fycopodites. (Lycopodiolithus and Walchia ^ternb.) Branches pinnated ; leaves inserted allnbsp;round the stem in two opposite rows, not leavingnbsp;clean and well-defined scars. Ad. Br.

78. Selaginites. Stems dichotomous, not presenting regular elevations at the base of the leaves, evennbsp;near the lower end of the stems. Leaves oftennbsp;persistent, enlarged at their base. Ad. Br.

Genus. 79. Lepidodendron. (Sagenaria.) Steins dichotomous, covered near their extremities by simple, linear,nbsp;or lanceolate leaves, inserted upon rhomboidalnbsp;areolae ; lower part of the stems leafless ; areolaenbsp;(longer than broad) marked near their upper partnbsp;by a minute scar, which is broader than long-,nbsp;and has three angles, of which the two lateral are acute, the lower obtuse; the latter sometimes wanting.

Genus 80. Ulodendron, Stem covered with rhomboidal areolae, which are broader than long; scars large, few, placed one above the other, circular, composed of broad cuneate scales, radiating from anbsp;common centre, and indicating the former presence of organs that were perhaps analogous tonbsp;the cones of Coniferse.

Genus 81. Lepidophyllum. Stem unknown. Leaves sessile, simple, entire, lanceolate, or linear, traversed bynbsp;a single midrib, or by three parallel ribs; nonbsp;veins. Ad. Br.

Genus 82, Lepidostrobus. Cones ovate, or cylindrical, composed of imbricated scales, inserted by a narrow base around a cylindrical woody axis; theirnbsp;points sometimes dilated and recurved in the formnbsp;of rhomboidal disks. Seed solitary, oblong, notnbsp;winged, nearly as long as the scales.

? Genus 83. Cardiocarpon. Fruit compressed, lenticular, heart-shaped, or kidney-shaped, terminated bynbsp;a sharpish point. Ad. Br,

Genus 84. Muscites, Stem simple, or branched, filiform, with membranous leaves, having scarcely anynbsp;midrib, and being sessile, or amplexicaul, imbricated, or somewhat spreading. Ad. Br.

A LG.�.

Confervites. Filaments simple, or branched, divided by internal partitions. Ad. Br.

Two species�in the Chalk-marle.

Fwcoides. (Algacites Schloth.) Frond continuous, never articulated, usually not symmetrical or subcylindrical, simple or oftener branched, naked or more commonly leafy; or membranous, entire, or more or less lobed, with no ribs, or imperfectly marked ones, which branchnbsp;in an irregular manner, and never anastomose.nbsp;Ad. Br.

Four species�in the Transition rocks.

^even species�in the Bituminous shale, fhree species�in the Oolitic formation.

Fleven species�in the Chalk.

Fileven species�in the London clay formation.

the affinity of which is altogether

UNCERTAIN.

^igillaria. (Bhytidolepis, Alveolaria, Favularia, Catenaria, amp;c. Slernb.) Stem conical, deeplynbsp;furrowed, not jointed. Scars placed betweennbsp;the furrows in rows, not arranged in a distinctlynbsp;spiral manner, smooth, much narrower than thenbsp;intervals that separate them.

About forty species�in the Coal formation.

Volkmannia. Stem striated, articulated. Leaves collected in approximated dense whorls.

Ihree species�in the Coal formation.

These are possibly the leaves of Calamites. darpolithes.

Under this name are arranged all the fossil fruits to which no other place is assigned.

Ij;;: � v,gt;�� :� : - nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�.''??

ifquot;'^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;quot;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;-.r''� *nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.'w��^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,4t,--w.v ^-,m*sgt;ylt;=e9

i ' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�'-*nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;��^''.� quot;CT

LIST O? STJBSCKlBETtS.

Abbs, Rev. G. C. Newcastle. Adamson, John, Esq. Nemcastie.nbsp;Alder, Mr. Joshua, Newcastle-Allan, Thomas, Esq. Edinburgh.nbsp;Armstrong, Robert, Esq.

Broadley, John, Esq. F.L.S. and H.S. President of the Hull Literary and Philosophical Society.

Buckland, Rev. W. D.D. F.R.S. G.S. and L.S. Professor of Mineralogy and Geology in the University ofnbsp;Oxford.

Clarke, Rev. W. B. A.M. F.G.S. East Bergholt, Suffolk, Cole, Robert, Esq, 33, Red Lion Square.

Reg. Soc. Paris. Corresp. Sully, near Cardiff. Cookson, Christopher, Esq. Newcastle.

Greenough, G. B. Esq. E.R.S. L.S. G.S. amp; H.S.M.R.A.S. Park Road, Regent�s Park.

Guillemard, John Lewis, Esq. M.A.F.R.S. G.S. and L.S. M.R.A.S. 27, Gower Street.

Henslow, Rev. J. 8. M.A. F.L.S. and G.S. Professor of Botany in the University of Cambridge.

Lonsdale, W. Esq. F.G.S. Curator of the Museum of the Geological Society, Somerset House.

^ . -p fl.s. Conl ^ Hing-

��eedham, John M. Esq. Nottingham. , pr g M.W.S. Neill, P. Esq. E.R.S.E. S.A. E.S- �

Scott, The Rev. T. Hobbs, Archdeacon of New South Wales, F.G.S. Whitfield Rectory, near Hexham.

Sebright, Sir J. S. Bart. M.P. F.G.S. and H.S. Beech-wood, near Market Street, Herts.

Sedgwick, Rev. A. M.A. F.R.S. G.S. Fellow of Trinity College, and Woodwardian Professor of the University of Cambridge.

Stokes, C. Esq. F.R.S. S.A. G.S. and L.S. M.R.A.S. 4, Verulam Buildings, Gray�s Inn.

Uitham, H. Esq. E.G.S, 149, King Street, Edinburgh. G, ^N. Esq. E.G.S. Manchester.

PINITES BRANDLINGI. WIDEOPEN FOSSIL TREE.

This plate represents a pottvo* ^ grindstone fossil, wVich lias lately occnrrenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;about five

and it has its name of � Grin ston , .nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;� a fnr mrhstone�

south-west, the lower end being towards the north-east; it tapered gradually from the bottom,nbsp;which was four feet nine inches, to the top,nbsp;which was eighteen inches in breadth. The substance of the fossil, where the wood was perfectlynbsp;petrified, was of a silicious nature, and of a brownnbsp;colour, having well defined crystals of ferruginousnbsp;quartz, in cavities interspersed through it, andnbsp;differing entirely from the surrounding mechanicalnbsp;deposit of sandstone. A few fine veins of whitenbsp;quartz, approaching chalcedony, passed throughnbsp;the substance of the fossil longitudinally. Anbsp;thickness of thirty feet of solid stone had beennbsp;worked away before it was discovered, which wasnbsp;at first accidentally, in the operations of thenbsp;quarry. It is to the scientific zeal and liberalitynbsp;of the Rev. R. H. Brandling, on whose estate thenbsp;quarry is, that we are indebted for our completenbsp;knowledge of this fossil giant of the vegetablenbsp;kingdom ; he having, at considerable trouble andnbsp;expense, caused it to be laid open to its full extent,nbsp;with the greatest care; and, besides, having hadnbsp;an artist upon the spot, who took a drawing beforenbsp;any attempt was made to move it from its bed.

When that portion of the stone which covered the fossil was carefully removed, there appearednbsp;a dull black carbonaceous substance, soft andnbsp;wet, and which soiled the fingers ; this completelynbsp;enveloped the whole fossil, and was a little morenbsp;than an inch thick, but without anv marking�

upon the surface indicative of t le Ig^yev of ^ of the plant.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Beneath this was ^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;and

of the woody fibre *, these two su ^atermixed. the whole of the fossil, hut nevenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;petrified

been tempted to try it with a km e.^ described, situation of the different parts 3 nsnbsp;will be best understood hy a sketch, w

. -yvliich the

oompression, which generally ha

assume the pointed shape shewn in the sketch, these points being completely filled with thenbsp;black matter; there was, also, frequently annbsp;empty space between the upper side of the fossilnbsp;and the covering of stone, as if from the shrinkingnbsp;or diminution of bulk in the tree, as shewn in thenbsp;sketch, at D.

It is difficult to account for the strongly marked difference of colour in the two enveloping substances, unless we suppose the black to have beennbsp;the bark, and the yellow to have arisen from thenbsp;decay of part of the woody fibre, before the slownbsp;petrifying process, by which the silicious particlesnbsp;were substituted for those of the wood, had timenbsp;to operate. It is probable the outer part all round,nbsp;as well as portions of the whole tree, had been innbsp;a state of decay before it was deposited where wenbsp;now find it, as the whole of the fossil, for six feetnbsp;in length at the lower end, was composed of thenbsp;soft, black, and yellow substances, just described jnbsp;the black always forming the outer coating only,nbsp;and the yellow being substituted for the entirenbsp;woody part. Where this occurred, the compression was very great, the breadth being at thenbsp;lowest part four feet nine inches, whilst the perpendicular thickness was only nine inches; tb�nbsp;higher end of the fossil was also entirely coiO'nbsp;posed of these substances, and very much flattened ; in one or two places in the length, also,nbsp;the woody fibre was almost entirely changed into

anxiety to preserve it whole, it^ jg not above that the largestnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;more than

eighteen inches long, and disp ays half the diameter of the fossil* ^ occur ia thenbsp;Many impressions of Oalanntes^ worthy ofnbsp;sandstone of this quarry ; an Jnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;cona-

There is a striking difference nature of this fossil, and of those we ^nbsp;in the sandstone or shale beds o ou Q^tsidenbsp;where we generally have a cast onbsp;form only, without the least indica ionnbsp;ternal organization, their substance 6111^nbsp;sa.e waL aa rhar ot thanbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;J-

occur; but here the case is en y The outer form is ill defined, whi st ^nbsp;ternal structure, even to the minunbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;cnffi-

is parfecfly pveserved. TWs oircumstaace

ciently indicates the difference o ^s of a of the two classes of plants; one

soft membranous texture, easily yielding to pressure and deca}^ whilst the strong woody fibre of the other would long withstand both, and allownbsp;that gradual substitution of matter, by infiltration,nbsp;by which alone delicate internal organic structuresnbsp;can be preserved.

a and h, the lower portion of the fossil, as it appeared when the covering of stone and thenbsp;powdery enveloping substances were removed.

Our tree was plainly, judging from its external appearance alone. Exogenous; of this the irregular arrangement of the knots, indicating the originnbsp;of branches upon its trunk, and its manifest tendency to a conical form, are sufficient evidence-This is confirmed by an examination of its anatomical structure, which is nearly as perfect as innbsp;recent wood.

Beautiful figures of the appearance of its tissue in a transverse section, have been given by

Mr. Witham ; and, in tins view, similar to that of Coniferse, tlm^ \onsed to thatnbsp;he inferred that the tree actualnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ithaui^

dinal section, in the direction o i ^gated cellular shews that the woody fibre (or e o ^aiportantnbsp;tissue) of the trunk differs lu some

shaving of pine wood, or refe^nce ^^^oirc sur to excellent figures of them innbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ and c, amp;e.

is discoverable. On the ^^quot;^[''�'^�^^^^culated, or the woody fibre are beautnu y g^^acture withnbsp;covered with hexagonal meshes, a ^ acquaintednbsp;nothing analogous to which ^e ^gp^esentednbsp;in the wood of recent plants. ^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;tissue i^

at fig. 2, where a small portion o very highly magnified.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;g^^ is more

perfectly preserved than of that which forms the subject of the next plate; but they are, nevertheless, so extremely similar, that no doubt cannbsp;exist of their both being, if not the same species,nbsp;at least very nearly allied. The principal differencenbsp;between them, consists in the reticulations of thenbsp;woody fibre of this fossil being more regular andnbsp;larger than those in the Craigleith plant.

limestone group. It was thirty-six ^ position three feet in diameter at its base ,nbsp;was nearly horizontal, or correspon 1 ,,u�^ofhnbsp;dip. No taanoV.es .vote to�''quot;'��J �orttonnbsp;there are indications of them nponnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^pe

Wideopen fossil, last described, the on w of this was entire, the bark being oonvnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;py

coal. The mineralizing substance was P carbonate of lime, the crystallization onbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;tissue

The figures represent highly magnified views of portions of the wood, drawn from specimens prepared by Mr. Sanderson, of Edinburgh.

1. Exhibits a longitudinal section, made in the direction of the medullary rays, some of which arenbsp;seen adhering to it, and lying across it. The tissuenbsp;consists of elongated cellules (woody fibre) fittednbsp;together by their rather abruptly pointed extremities, and very like those of Cupressus sempervirens.nbsp;There is no trace of any kind of vessel passingnbsp;through this tissue. The membrane of the cel-lules has, now and then, a reticulated appearance,nbsp;as if it had been itself composed of extremelynbsp;minute spheroidal cellules, or filled with such;nbsp;these are, occasionally, apparent, where the specimen is sufficiently transparent to allow light tonbsp;be transmitted freely, except when the membranenbsp;of the tissue has been destroyed in the grindingnbsp;down and polishing; they seem to have beennbsp;smaller than in the Wideopen fossil, but are bynbsp;no means so beautifully preserved. Whethernbsp;this difference in the reticulation was connectednbsp;with external characters, we have, at present�nbsp;no means of judging; there is no trace of anynbsp;other kind of organization. The medullary raysnbsp;are merely indicated by various transverse bars�nbsp;such as are represented.

2. Seems to be a longitudinal tangental section, in which the elongated cellules of the v'ood

'liured, than i� appear more distorted an J ixieduliaTynbsp;the last; and the pa^g� quot;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;��

of the membranes of the elongate ^ ^-jQ^e or less �wood, as described in fignrenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^j^ye been

a transverse section, highly magm � medullary rays, one of winchnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;layers of

Mr. Witham, in his beautiful work on Fossil Vegetables, above quoted; especially in the absence of any trace of concentric zones in the wood. Innbsp;a polished piece, four inches and a half across,nbsp;nothing of the kind is to be detected. Mr. Withamnbsp;correctly observes, that, in every thing else, in anbsp;horizontal view, the accordance between this plantnbsp;and Coniferse, is perfect; but in a longitudinalnbsp;section of Coniferas, the walls of the woody tissuenbsp;are, as has been before stated, in all the recentnbsp;species that have been examined, distinctlynbsp;marked with circular elevations, equal to aboutnbsp;half the breadth of the elongated cellules, eachnbsp;having the appearance of a perforation in itsnbsp;centre. Of these circular elevations, no trace isnbsp;discoverable in this fossil; on the contrary, thenbsp;walls appear, as above described, to consist ofnbsp;very minute cellules, arranged in a reticulatednbsp;manner. We are, therefore, compelled to conclude,nbsp;notwithstanding the great similarity between thenbsp;transverse sections of this wood, and those of recentnbsp;Conifer�, and notwithstanding the total absence ofnbsp;ducts, in what seems to have been a tree, havingnbsp;an Exogenous structure, yet that as the very remarkable organization of the walls of the woodynbsp;tissue of recent Coniferas does not exist in thisnbsp;fossil, but is supplied by another kind of structurenbsp;of an equally unusual nature, the inference thatnbsp;this tree belonged to the Coniferous tribe cannotnbsp;be considered altogether just.

A CRAIGLEITH FOSSIL BRANCH.

powder was used, which proba y ^ branch, part of which is here fie,onbsp;could not be satisfactorily ascertaine ^ acies,

shale beds of the coal formation, an ^ Pj^estone the members of the subjacent mounnbsp;group. The coal itself very rarelynbsp;marks of organic structure. Id manynbsp;stones, although the fossils arenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;i, .^vhich

the large and strongly marked m ivr ^ough* have left their forms impressenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^Een

The limestone itself has, hitherto, afforded but few vegetable remains; nevertheless, we shallnbsp;have to notice, in the progress of this work, somenbsp;beautiful examples, both from the limestones ofnbsp;Northumberland, and from those in the neighbour'nbsp;hood of Edinburgh, which are curious from theirnbsp;intimate connection with the remains of animals-It is the beds of shale, or argillaceous schistuS,nbsp;which afford the most abundant supply of thesenbsp;curious relics of a former world ; the fine particlesnbsp;of which they are composed, having sealed up andnbsp;retained, in wonderful perfection and beauty, thenbsp;most delicate outward forms of the vegetablenbsp;organic structure.

Where shale forms the roof of the workable seams of coal, as it generally does, we have thenbsp;most abundant display of fossils ; and this, not,nbsp;perhaps, arising so much from any peculiarity innbsp;these beds, as from their being more extensivelynbsp;known and examined than any others. Thenbsp;principal deposit is not in immediate contact withnbsp;the coal, but about twelve to twenty inches abovenbsp;it; and such is the immense profusion in thisnbsp;situation, that they are not unfrequently the causenbsp;of very serious accidents, by breaking the adhesion of the shale bed, and causing it to separatenbsp;and fall, when, by the operations of the miner,nbsp;the coal which supported it is removed. Afternbsp;an extensive fall of this kind has taken place, hnbsp;is a curious sight to see the roof of the mine

compare them with recent plants, vi , surface, their foliage, their rawifica^onbsp;their texture.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;#

With regard to their surface, in both and Lycopodiacem, the leaves have anbsp;arrangement, and the scars, or marks, cannbsp;the fall of the latter, are of a similar mnbsp;Coniferse, the leaves are arranged upon t e^nbsp;in two very different ways. First, in t e sp

having, what botanists denominate, fascicled foliage, such as the Scotch Fir (Pinus Sylvestris), the Pinaster (Pinus Pinaster), the Weymouthnbsp;Pine (P. Strobus), and the like, the first leavesnbsp;that are developed are brown and membranous, roll back and wither away, almost immediately after the young branch has acquired itsnbsp;first growth. From the axilla of each of these,nbsp;sprouts forth a bud, that never or rarely elongates,nbsp;but which produces several leaves, the outermostnbsp;of which are membranous and perishable like thenbsp;first ; but the innermost, narrow and rigid, form*nbsp;ing the permanent green foliage of the species ; innbsp;these, where the foliage is fallen away, the stemnbsp;is covered with numerous narrow projections,nbsp;thickest at the upper end, where the remains ofnbsp;withered leaves are visible, arranged, spirally, withnbsp;great symmetry, and separated by intervals, usuallynbsp;equal, at least to twice the breadth of the projections-Secondly, In the species in which the leaves amnbsp;solitary, as in the Spruce fir, the Araucaria, thenbsp;Cunninghamia, amp;c., the leaves that are originallynbsp;developed when the young shoot forms, nevetnbsp;undergo any material alteration, but are thosenbsp;which subsequently become the green foliagenbsp;the plant; none, or few, apparent axillary bud�nbsp;are developed ; and, finally, the leaves either sepu'nbsp;rate by a clean scar of a rhomboidal or roundishnbsp;figure, with a depressed point in its middle, whomnbsp;the vascular bundle connecting the stem and l�*'^

V. or separate imperfectly, was broken throngk,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P upon ^ rbom-

boidal areola. The yew ^^^^^ia of the former; Cnnninghamia annbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;rhomboidal

latter. In all cases, the sears, or^ ^^^uner, areolae, are disposed in anbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Coniferous

of the stems, after the leaves have (Hfference, would be difficult to point out a ^ p^^jumnbsp;except that they are often, as mnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;gpiral,

caria, and of Lycopodiacem, rs ^^^^Xsuishable, their casts would be scarcelynbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Lepido-

The ramifications of Conifer� an ce� are essentially different. In the ornbsp;branches arise from the same plane onnbsp;of the main stem, often assuming a ver �nbsp;ra�ge,�e�. In the latter, the branch b.teca^^.nbsp;whenever a new bud is brought into ac ,

the whole of the divisions are dichotomous ; and the same takes place in the inflorescence whenevernbsp;the latter is compound, as in L. Phlegmaria. Hence,nbsp;Lepidodendra are more related to Lycopodiacesenbsp;than to Conifer�, in their manner of branching;nbsp;and as dichotomous ramifications are extremelynbsp;rare in recent plants, this circumstance, takennbsp;together with their other characters, strengthensnbsp;M. A. Brongniart�s opinion of their strong analogynbsp;with Lycopodiace�.

The texture and size of Lycopodiace� and Conifer� are very dissimilar. The former arenbsp;soft cellular plants, with small creeping ornbsp;erect stems, no bark, and an imperfect formationnbsp;of a woody axis; the latter are large trees,nbsp;with a thick bark, and a hard woody centre,nbsp;which is incapable of compression by any ordinary force. With neither tribe do Lepidodendra agree in these points; they resemble Lyco-])odiace� in their soft stem; for specimens, somenbsp;inches in diameter, are found so compressed, as tonbsp;be nothing more than a thin plate; but theynbsp;agree with Conifer� in the size they seem to havenbsp;attained, and in the presence of bark, althoughnbsp;that part is thin, compared with the bark of recentnbsp;Conifer�.

Upon the whole, we are led to conclude, that the Lepidodendron genus was not exactly likenbsp;either Conifer� or Lycopodiace�, but that itnbsp;occupied an intermediate station between those

two orders, approaching more near y than to the former.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;to he

distinct from the L. Sternhergh o ^ speci-the broader figure of nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;thenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;areoiationnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;proba-

these leaves separated; ana that runs from the depression towar ,nbsp;base of the rhomboidal space,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;any

originally, and does not seem o relation to the organic union onbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;is

obliterated. The depression, m so evidently caused by the breaking o ^ onbsp;leaves from the axis, where the bed, mnbsp;specimen laid, was divided.

ULODENDRON MAJUS.

The specimen here figured, is from the shale forming the roof of the Bensham coal seam, innbsp;Jai�row Colliery, near Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

It would be probable that this was an old stem of a Lepidodendron, and even, perhaps, of L. Stern-bergii, notwithstanding the areolae of the surfacenbsp;being different in figure from those of that species,nbsp;if the figure of the areolations were altered by agenbsp;in Lepidodendron, as in recent Coniferse. In thenbsp;latter, areolae, which, when young, have their perpendicular diameter the greatest, alter into rhomboids, having their horizontal diameter the longest;nbsp;a circumstance which arises from the tissue of thenbsp;bark being stained horizontally by the formationnbsp;of new wood beneath it. But M. Adolphenbsp;Brongniart has well observed, {Prodrome, p, 84,;nbsp;that the scars of Lepidodendron, instead of

, � � the ff�owtb of the shortening, lengthen during ^ate of Countnbsp;plant, as is shown in the J in placesnbsp;Sternberg�s Essai, and as is . that Eepi-4. and 9 of this worh, whence henbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^�t^ithout

in these two orders we have not m be compared to those large scars upon ^p^encenbsp;of this specimen, which indicatenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;n^^ggcence

must have fallen. It would seem portions, whatever they were, consinbsp;imbricated closely over each other aW ^

scars are placed one beneath the other, and not spirally, or alternately, npon the stem. The furrows upon the surface of the specimen shew, that it hasnbsp;been pressed from a cylindrical into a flat figure.

For the convenience of speaking of fossils of this kind, we have provisionally called them by anbsp;name suggested by their scars, notwithstanding anbsp;possibility of their being old stems of Lepido-dendron; and we have done this with the lessnbsp;reluctance, seeing that the nomenclature of fossilnbsp;botany must, for some time, be necessarily merelynbsp;provisional to a great extent.

i'�-

,-v

^ Iak ifi lEdinhnrgh Philosoph,. Trans, vol 9, p. 235. t. 14. �Pidodendron ornatissimum. Ad. Brong. prodr. p. 85.

The specimen from which this in shale; W the root of the highnbsp;ft South Shields Colliery,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Edinhurgh

That figured by Mr. Allan,

dendron maps; we, neverthele , because, in recent plants, the sizenbsp;of inflorescence, in the same species,nbsp;terially diflierent, whatever may be the agenbsp;individual that bears them; while, mnbsp;scars indicate traces of lost bonbsp;scarcely half as large as those onbsp;maiids TVi.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;has been pressed hai,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;_

on the opposite side to that which has been drawn is a similar row of scars, having the samenbsp;arrangement. It would be probable, that thisnbsp;specimen is represented in an inverted position,nbsp;if we were sure that the laws of its structurenbsp;were the same as those of recent plants; butnbsp;there is no satisfactory evidence upon this point.

LEPIDODENDKOH DILATATUM.

Fvom the roof of the low main coal seam m Felling Colliery, near Newcastle-upon-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,

This fossil is scarcely referable to any g Lepidodendron. It appears to havenbsp;fragment of the apex of some di ate sp gt;nbsp;which has been compressed, without ^ ^ ^nbsp;ment of its parts having been disturbed, � o 'nbsp;sibly, it may be the same as that represented ynbsp;the upper left hand figure of the secon panbsp;Count Sternberg�s Flore du monde primhj.nbsp;leaves are lenger than in L. Sternbergii?nbsp;that author considered his to belong.

LEPIDODENDRON ? ACEROS�M.

The species here figured, is from the shale, forming the roof of the low main coal seam atnbsp;Felling Colliery, near Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

Both these specimens, and that represented at figure 1, of the last plate, are, no doubt, fragments of the same species. We refer them tonbsp;Fepidodendron with doubt, because of the absence of any proof of their stemshaving been dichotomous, and on account of the irregular manner innbsp;^rhich the leaves originated. We do not find thatnbsp;Uniformity of size in the scars, and that symmetri-eal arrangement, which are so characteristic of truenbsp;Lepidodendra: but instead, an imperfectly spiralnbsp;appearance, which does not seem to be owingnbsp;to the specimen having been crushed, but to havenbsp;heen part of its original nature. This is particularly apparent in figure 1 ; and also, in figurenbsp;plate 7.

From shale, in the roof of the low main coal seam, Felling Colliery. A fine specimen is in thenbsp;possession of the Geological Society.

This beautiful fossil gives a good idea of what a true Lepidodendron was, and exhibits a morenbsp;distinct approach to Lycopodium, especially suchnbsp;species as L. squarrosum, than the larger species.nbsp;It resembles Lepidodendron Sternbergii in manynbsp;respects, but seems to have been more slender, andnbsp;to have had smaller leaves, leaving more acutelynbsp;rhomboidal scars.

Au the specimens here figured, are from the shale, forming the roof of the Bensham coal seam,nbsp;at Jarrow Colliery.

These are, no doubt, bodies analogous to that figured by Parkinson, in his organic remains,nbsp;(vol. 1. pi. 9. f. 1.) which M. A. Brongniart callsnbsp;Lepidostrobus ornatus, and which he considersnbsp;as a cone, the scales of which are terminated bynbsp;rhomboidal disks, imbricated from above downwards.

The arrangement of the terminations of the scales in this species is certainly the reverse *, thenbsp;scales are sharp pointed, and are imbricated innbsp;the usual way, all their ends turning towards thenbsp;apex of the cone.

It might be supposed, that it was such bodies as these that left behind them the scars on thenbsp;Ulodendra, tab. 5 and 6, and that they werenbsp;really the fructification of that genus. Uponnbsp;this subject we shall have some observations tonbsp;offer, in discussing the structure of the fossil,nbsp;represented at tab. 11.

These specimens exhibit other states of the fossil represented in the last plate. That they allnbsp;belong to the same species, we can scarcely doubt,nbsp;considering their being constantly found together ;nbsp;and that their differences are apparently dependent only upon their different ages; thus tab. 10.nbsp;fig- 2., a. and fig. 1. of this plate, are very young ;nbsp;tab. 10. fig. 2. b. is rather older; fig. 3. tab. 10.nbsp;�^ay be the same thing further developed, thenbsp;Conical termination visible in the young speci-^ens having changed into a rounded one.

'8- 1. tab. lO., shews the fossil at a yet more ^dvanced age ; and we have a specimen nownbsp;cfore us still longer, with the end doubled back,nbsp;*^cnsequence, as it would seem, of some pres-

A conical axis, around which a great quantity of scales were compactly imbricated from thenbsp;base upwards, was obviously the structure of thisnbsp;species of Lepidostrobus. These scales were narrow, and gradually acuminated, as represented atnbsp;tab. 11. fig. 1. when young ; but when older, theynbsp;appear, from other specimens, to have becomenbsp;broadly ovate, with a rigid mucro. That thenbsp;scales were imbricate from below upwards, theirnbsp;points being directed to the apex of the cone, isnbsp;evident, in young specimens, such as fig. 1. tab. 11.nbsp;and, indeed, from many older specimens also.nbsp;Sometimes, however, they are apparently turnednbsp;downwards, a circumstance that is owing to theirnbsp;having been forcibly compressed from above downwards; an instance of this is given at fig. 1. a.nbsp;tab. 10., in which the left side is in such a state,nbsp;while the right side retains its natural position.nbsp;Their axis appears, notwithstanding its thickness,nbsp;to have been soft and pliable; at least, such annbsp;inference seems warranted by the specimen beforenbsp;alluded to, in which the cone is bent almostnbsp;double, without any fracture, an inch and a halfnbsp;below its apex; a circumstance which certainlynbsp;would not have taken place in any part, of whichnbsp;the axis was woody and rigid.

Mr. Adolphe Brongniart entertains no doubt of these cones being reproductive bodies, analogousnbsp;to those of recent Coniferse, and Lycopodiacese;nbsp;and, it is probable, that this view of their nature

is correct \ at the same time, it must be confessed, that if all the species had, like the original species,nbsp;scales, with a dilated reflexed, rhomboidal disk, itnbsp;might be a matter of doubt whether they were notnbsp;more nearly related to Cycadese.* It may furthernbsp;be remarked, that in some specimens, there seemsnbsp;to have been a cylindrical, or oblong body, lyingnbsp;in the axilla of each scale; and, in such instances,nbsp;the appearance of the fossil is very like that of anbsp;young shoot of the genus Pinus, before the firstnbsp;ramentaceous leaves are pushed aside by thenbsp;secondary green permanent ones, (see page 18, atnbsp;the top) ; nor is this the only important point ofnbsp;resemblance between Lepidostrobus, and the youngnbsp;shoots of Pinus ; the latter vary much in appear-3^nce, according to their age; and their ramentaceous scales, which point upwards when young,nbsp;roll backwards when older. Such shoots are,nbsp;also, very flexible; and their axis, when strippednbsp;of the scales, has scars, arranged much in thenbsp;same manner as in the fossil. So striking, indeed,nbsp;amp;re these analogies, that there is only one pointnbsp;that decides us in adopting M. Brongniart�s view,nbsp;namely, that the Lepidostrobi were always articulated with their stem; a circumstance which isnbsp;common in those masses of inflorescence, whichnbsp;Botanists call amenta, or strobili, and to which

As Lepidostrobi may be considered to have been almost proved to be organs of fructification,nbsp;it is a point of great moment to discover to whatnbsp;other fossil remains they appertain. In the opinion of M. Brongniart, they undoubtedly belongnbsp;to Lepidodendron ; and supposing that Ulodendranbsp;could be shewn to be old stems of Lepidodendra,nbsp;we should entirely agree with him ; for, althoughnbsp;no one has succeeded in discovering Lepidostrobi,nbsp;except in their detached state, yet there is sonbsp;much resemblance between the base of these cones,nbsp;and the scars of Ulodendron, that one can hardlynbsp;doubt their having been separated from each other.nbsp;We have a specimen of the base of what appearsnbsp;to have been a Lepidostrobus, from the Barnsleynbsp;coal field, given us by Mr. Edgar, which is so likenbsp;in size and structure the lower scar of Ulodendronnbsp;minus, tab. 6., that they actually look as if onenbsp;had been broken off the other. But even in regardnbsp;to the identity of Ulodendra and Lepidostrobi,nbsp;there is this difficulty, that while the latter arenbsp;very common, the former are extremely rare; andnbsp;in taking M. Brongniart�s view of the question, thenbsp;difficulty seems increased. In the first place, itnbsp;has been shewn, (p. 20-21,) that the affinity ofnbsp;Lepidodendra, judging from their stems and leavesnbsp;only, is greater with Lycopodiacem than anything

else that is recent. Now, this opinion is incompatible with the Lepidostrobi belonging to Lepi-dodendra, because the fructification of Lycopodia-ceas consists in a mere alteration of the leaves at the ends of the branches, without any dis-articu-lation ever, in any known instance, taking place.nbsp;Moreover, the fructification of Lycopodiacese isnbsp;always terminal; and, although we have numerousnbsp;well preserved ends of Lepidodendron branches, nonbsp;one has seen them assuming the appearance of anbsp;Lepidostrobus. Another difficulty in the way ofnbsp;M. A. Brongniart�s supposition, is, that Lepidostrobi are much more common in company withnbsp;Ferns and Calamites, than with Lepidodendra. Ofnbsp;four large specimens now before us, containing impressions of Lepidostrobi, there is not a trace of anbsp;Lepidodendron; in one specimen, a single largenbsp;cone lies among fragments of ferns; in a second,nbsp;we have five Lepidostrobi, with a few indistinctnbsp;casts, either of a Calamites, like C. arenaceus, ornbsp;of the stalk of some large fern-leaf; in a third,nbsp;there are nine Lepidostrobi, with a morsel of somenbsp;Calamites, and a fragment of the leaf of some Neu-ropteris; while, in the fourth, a single cone liesnbsp;among fragments of Calamites, and various fernnbsp;stems.

Mquot;e shall take an early opportunity of return-uig to this enquiry. In the mean while, we would particularly direct the attention of Geologists tonbsp;the importance of discovering these bodies actually

attached to the plants to which they belong. Such is the uncertainty of all these inquiries, that, untilnbsp;the cones shall have been discovered in such anbsp;state, any view of the subject must be extremelynbsp;conjectural.

L. selaginoides. Stemberg essai d�un expos� geognostico-^otanique, ^c. p. 35. t. 16. �. 3. and 1.17. f-1. Ad Brongn. prodrome, p, 85.

*' Pinus sylvestris Mugo Tabernsemontani et Mathioli. Volkm. Siles. subterr. 1.12. �. 6.�

�6.

This species is no doubt identical with the plant ^gared by Count Sternberg, from the coal minesnbsp;Schatzlar and Swina, which he particularlynbsp;characterizes by the rounded figure of the scarsnbsp;^cft by its leaves. This distinction, it must benbsp;observed, is only applicable to young branches ofnbsp;^^0 species �, in the old stems, with which Count

Sternberg seems to have been unacquainted, the scars are narrow lozenges, with a depression innbsp;their centre ; and are so like the figure of Palma-cites incisus, given by Schlotheim, in his Petrefac-tenkunde, upon which M. Adolphe Brongniartnbsp;founded his Lepidodendron irabricatum, that wenbsp;can scarcely doubt their being the same. If wenbsp;are right in this reference, the species has alsonbsp;been noticed in the slate-clay of Wettin, andnbsp;Eschweiler.

It is readily known by its short compactly imbricated leaves, the form of which seems to have been ovate-acuminate, by the rounded scars onnbsp;the young branches, and the narrow lozengeshaped spaces, with a single central depression innbsp;the old ones.

In the specimen from which our figure was taken, two of the young branches were thickened,nbsp;as if their leaves concealed axillary bodies. Shouldnbsp;these be really the fructification of a Lepidodendron, we presume it will be no longer possible tonbsp;admit the identity of Lepidostrobus, and thatnbsp;genus.

Whether this is either the S. truncatum, or dissectum, of M. Adolphe Brongniart, to whichnbsp;^either characters or references are assigned, we

from all his other species. We beg, therefore, tliat our distinguished friend, whom we havenbsp;DO scruple in most conscientiously designating asnbsp;the father of Fossil Botany, and as the only person that has hitherto viewed the subject, as Cuviernbsp;has the Fossil Animal Kingdom, with the eye of anbsp;man of science, and a skilful Naturalist, we beg,nbsp;We say, that he will not impute any deviation fromnbsp;his terminology, if into such we may fall, to dis-mspect; but rather, as we have already said, tonbsp;mere unacquaintance with his materials. Fornbsp;differences in opinion, as to the inferences to benbsp;drawn from particular data, we feel that apology

is unnecessary. No man is more capable than the learned Botanist, to whose name we are thusnbsp;appealing, of appreciating the almost hopeless investigations of those who attempt to investigatenbsp;the analogy of recent and fossil vegetable structure.

M. Brongniart refers Sphenophyllum to the family of Marsileacese ;¹ but it seems to us, wenbsp;confess, that this decision has been too hasty.nbsp;It is true, that the leaves have the dichotomousnbsp;veins of that family; and some analogy may, perhaps, be traced between their form and that of certain Marsileas. But when it is considered thatnbsp;the latter belong to a division of the vegetablenbsp;kingdom, in which no such thing as verticillatenbsp;leaves is known, and that all the Sphenophyllanbsp;have their leaves most perfectly verticillate, it willnbsp;at once be seen, that doubts may be reasonablynbsp;entertained of the correctness of the approximation. An idea that Ceratophyllum has some relation to Sphenophyllum, has, probably, by thisnbsp;time, been abandoned.

While we thus differ from M. Brongniart, in regard to the families to which he has approximated Sphenophyllum, we are scarcely prepared tonbsp;say to what else they are related. Perhaps, however, the following considerations may not benbsp;inappropriate.

There are no recent plants in which the veins of the leaves are dichotomous, except Ferns andnbsp;their allies, and Coniferae.

The veins of the leaves of Sphenophyllum are, all cases, distinctly dichotomous, as is particularly seen in beautiful specimens of Sph. Schlo-fheimii, of which our indefatigable friend, Mr.nbsp;Lonsdale, has shewn us specimens in the splendidnbsp;collection of the Geological Society, to which theynbsp;Lad been presented by the Rev. Mr. Skinner;nbsp;fherefore, Sphenophyllum is analogous, either tonbsp;^�rns or Coniferae, among recent plants.

^hile Ferns, and their allies, have constantly leaves with an alternate origin, Coniferae have thenbsp;leaves as frequently verticillate as alternate.

The leaves of Sphenophyllum are verticillate ; fLerefore, Sphenophyllum is more nearly related tonbsp;Coniferae than to Ferns, and their allies.

This seems to us a legitimate conclusion, and it strengthened by some circumstances thatnbsp;cserve notice. In the first place, the leavesnbsp;� Sphenophyllum are dilated at the apex, likenbsp;cse of Salisburia, a genus of Coniferae, andnbsp;c exactly the same sort of veining : secondly,nbsp;.^Le specimens above referred to, from Mr.nbsp;g ^^�ier, in the collection of the Geologicalnbsp;ygt; there seems to be a slight squamulosenbsp;^Pearance at the base of each leaf, which, allnbsp;^ otanists will admit, would, if distinctly proved,nbsp;almost decisive of the question of the fossil

belonging to Coniferse; and thirdly, in the same beautiful specimens from Mr. Skinner, particularlynbsp;in one numbered 16,916, from the Somerset coalnbsp;field, the stem is distinctly marked with deepnbsp;furrows, the ridges of which plainly correspondnbsp;with the leaves. Now this is a character, so completely in accordance with that of the Yew, thenbsp;Spruce Fir, and other Coniferous plants, that,nbsp;taken together with what we have previously remarked, it leaves scarcely any doubt in our mind,nbsp;that, Sphenophyllum was one of those plants,nbsp;which in the ancient world represented the Pinenbsp;tribe of modern Floras.

Pw 2.

ASTEROPHYLLITES TUBERCULATA.

Ast, tuberculata. Ad. Brmgn. Prodr. No. 6. Bruckmannia tuberculata. Sternberg Essai d�nn exposenbsp;S*iognostico-botanique. fase. 4. p. xxix. t. 45. �. 2.

From, the shale forming the roof of the Low Main coal seam, in Felling Colliery, near Newcastle.

Nothing more than fragments, such as are here represented, have been seen of this fossil; fromnbsp;which it is extremely difficult to form any clearnbsp;idea of its nature. We have only portions of cylindrical stems, with internodia about twice as broadnbsp;ns they are long, and verticillate leaves, which are,nbsp;however, so imperfectly preserved, that neithernbsp;their outline, length, or number, can be judgednbsp;ch They seem, however, to have been numerous.nbsp;In some places, the central substance of the branchnbsp;is laid bare, by the separation of what appears tonbsp;have been a bark, of considerable thickness, in

proportion to the whole diameter, and here the nodi are distinctly shewn to have been prominent.nbsp;Such a specimen is represented at fig. 1. Thenbsp;only inference that can be safely drawn from this,nbsp;seems to be, that the plant was not endogenous;nbsp;if it had been, its cortical integument would notnbsp;have separated in so distinct a manner, as it isnbsp;evident that it did.

It might be suspected that it belonged to some species of Calamites, in consequence of its resemblance to the subjects of the two next plates, andnbsp;more especially because specimens have beennbsp;found of a size intermediate between the two; butnbsp;there is no trace of the distinct parallel furrows,nbsp;by which the stems of Calamites are to be recognized when their cortical integument is removed.nbsp;Had the furrows been discoverable, it wouldnbsp;certainly have been probable, that this fossil didnbsp;belong to a Calamite, and C. approximatus mightnbsp;have even been named as the species; but the objection just mentioned, appears to render the supposition unsafe, until, what is not improbable, it shallnbsp;have been discovered that very young branches ofnbsp;Calamite are destitute of the furrows.

This, undoubtedly, is very nearly the same as the fossil represented at fig. 2, of the first plate ofnbsp;Von Schlotheim�s Beitrage zur Flora der Vorwelt,nbsp;and compared, by that author, to the modern Hip-puris vulgaris; but it would seem to have hadnbsp;shorter and more numerous leaves. That species.

^ith a few others, are placed by M. Adolphe Brongniart at the end of his Arrangement of Fossilnbsp;Plants, under the genus Asterophyllites, with thenbsp;�iote, that they are perhaps the only traces ofnbsp;Dicotyledonous plants in the coal measures, and anbsp;suggestion that it is with modern Haloragem,* ornbsp;Ceratophylleae,'!' that they must be compared. Thenbsp;latter part of this opinion being derived from annbsp;luspection of specimens, apparently in fruit, suchnbsp;Us we have not seen, we are unable to judge of itsnbsp;Value ; the former it is necessary to abandon en-brely, in consequence of the discovery of thosenbsp;Undoubted Dicotyledonous plants already figurednbsp;in this Work, under the name of Pinites; to saynbsp;nothing of such others as it may be conjecturednbsp;belonged to the same great division of the vegetable kingdom.

These traces of axillary fructification are also strongly dwelt upon by Count Sternberg, who re-Ibrs the fossil to the heterogeneous assemblagenbsp;nailed, by some botanists. Naiades; they are,nbsp;owever, not represented in his figure.

15�16

hist, des V�cj�taux Fossiles, 1. 133. t. 23. Jig. 2�4. tumidus. Steriib. fase. 4. p. xxvi. according to Brong-

This belongs to a large and well known class of fossils, of which the steins are more abundant innbsp;fire beds of the Carboniferous formation of thenbsp;north of England, than any others. They are oftennbsp;found in close alliance with the coal itself, espe-cially when thin layers of mineral charcoal arenbsp;discovered upon it.

In consequence of their abundance, and the prominent feature they must have formed in the

matter were tlie whole stem, there ought, m all cases, to be a fractured surface in impressionsnbsp;of the circumference of the nodi, because thenbsp;phragmata which would, in that case, be continuous with the outer coaly invelope, must necessarily be broken through round all the circumference ; this never happens, as far as we have hadnbsp;an opportunity of observing.

We have said that the cavity of the stem was apparently separated by phragmata, or horizontalnbsp;partitions, at the nodi; and in speaking thus, wenbsp;have adopted the expression of M. Adolphe Brong-niart, and the common opinion upon the subject.nbsp;At the same time, we feel considerable doubt ofnbsp;the accuracy of this view of their structure. It isnbsp;not impossible, that what we call phragmata, maynbsp;represent, in reality, the whole thickness of thenbsp;wood, and that the open space that occupies thenbsp;centre of these supposed phragmata, is all the cavity that existed in the stem. Supposing it shouldnbsp;be demonstrated that there was both wood andnbsp;bark in these plants, the latter opinion will be materially strengthened.

Some have supposed these fossils to have been analogous to reeds, whence the name of Calamites ;nbsp;but there does not appear to be any solid groundnbsp;for that opinion. M. Adolphe Brongniart has endeavoured to make out a close affinity with Equi-setum, relying chiefly upon the resemblance innbsp;their furrowed stems, the lines of which alternate

�it their union at tlie nodi^ and upon the presence of a sheath in his C. radiatus, analogous to that ofnbsp;Equisetum; and accounting for the more generalnbsp;absence of the sheath upon the well known, and,nbsp;�n Botany, incontestible principle, that the excessive developement of one organ (in this case thenbsp;stem) often causes an abortion, or non-devclope-iiient of a contiguous organ, (here the sheath.) Butnbsp;notwithstanding the ingenuity with which M.nbsp;Brongniart has maintained his proposition, wenbsp;confess there appear to us to be grave objections tonbsp;He does not appear to have attached that va-Eie to the presence of wood and bark, which, innbsp;*nch an enquiry as this, is so important a circumstance in determining affinity. Nothing of the kindnbsp;IS known either in recent Equisetacese, or in anynbsp;endogenous or monocotyledonous plants ; it is, onnbsp;contrary, strictly characteristic of exogenousnbsp;dicotyledonous plants. In Equisetum itself,nbsp;Nothing could produce such a clean separation ofnbsp;inner and outer portions of the stem, as wenbsp;in Catamites; neither do we know of any recent endogenous plants in which it would happen ;

'vould, ill all probability, not occur even in iich as Aloe, which, although endogenous, have anbsp;cellular integument.

e should rather consider Calamites as the renin s of Some dicotyledonous plants, the affinity of ^ ^ if any exist, has still to be traced,nbsp;ne of M. Brongniart�s arguments in favour ofnbsp;E 3

a relationship with Equisetui�ij is derived^ as has been stated above, from the discovery of a speciesnbsp;of Calamite with the remains of a sheath, like thatnbsp;of the modern genus. It would be very desirablenbsp;to ascertain whether that sheath is not of the samenbsp;nature as the verticilli of leaves upon the specimensnbsp;now represented, and which seem to be the leavesnbsp;of a Calamite. We say seem, because, althoughnbsp;we can scarcely doubt the fact, yet we know hownbsp;unsafe it is, in this department of science, to makenbsp;a single step without using the greatest caution.nbsp;Although we have examined a fine series of specimens of this fossil, where the leaf-bearing branch isnbsp;always associated with the stem, yet, as in no instance they have been found actually in conjunction, fig. 1. tab. 15., being the nearest approachnbsp;to it that we have seen, we pause before we finallynbsp;decide. Our specimens are too much mutilatednbsp;for us to determine, with accuracy, either thenbsp;form of the leaves, or their number, or the exactnbsp;figure and manner of insertion of the youngnbsp;branches : the latter, however, always arise from anbsp;nodus, in the manner that is represented. In anbsp;part of one of our specimens a verticillus of leavesnbsp;is depressed, and then resembles so very much thenbsp;supposed sheath figured by M. Brongniart, that itnbsp;is difficult not to suspect their identity.

Although we do not at present see that the discovery of these supposed leaves throws muchnbsp;light upon the affinity that Calamites bear to

modern plants, yet it is obviously so extremely desirable to ascertain whether or not they reallynbsp;belong to the genus, that we trust our geologicalnbsp;friends will neglect no opportunity of settling thenbsp;question.

In the genus Calamites it is exceedingly difficult determine what are called the species, even bynbsp;the comparison of authentic specimens; and it isnbsp;scarcely possible to doubt that a large number ofnbsp;thena are merely different states of the same species. We presume this is the C. nodosusofVonnbsp;^chlotheim, and A. Brongniart, although it doesnbsp;^ot retain the thick bark mentioned by the latter,nbsp;characteristic of that species. It is difficult tonbsp;Understand why C. ramosus is not also the same.

^e think that Count Sternberg�s Volkmannia Pnlystachya, which seems to have been a littlenbsp;embellished by his artist, must be referable here.

We find no record of this fossil, which is too imperfect to enable us to judge distinctly of itsnbsp;nature, it appears to have been a plant of con-��^iderable size, with numerous verticillate branches,nbsp;mid verticillate subulate leaves, arising from nodi,nbsp;very remote from each other. Little more can benbsp;said about it, except that, in many respects, itnbsp;may be compared with Calamites, from which itnbsp;mily differs in having its branches very imperfectly furrowed ; a circumstance not unlikely tonbsp;Fe due to the peculiar state of the specimen, andnbsp;fn its not being subject to such ready disarticu-^^tiou, as is usual in that genus.

,'*ir

Brukmannia longifolia. Sternb. essai d�uti expos� g�ognostico-'lt;iiiique. fase. 4. t. 58. �. 1.

It is probable, that this plant is of the same �'ature as Asterophyllites tuberculata, from whichnbsp;It differs specifically, in the much greater lengthnbsp;of its leaves. At the same time, it must be re-o^arked, that the specimens in our possession,nbsp;although very perfect, do not exhibit any trace ofnbsp;axillary bodies, said to exist in that species;nbsp;and by which, indeed, the genus Asterophyllitesnbsp;is essentially characterized.

Yount Sternberg refers it to Equisetacese, an approximation which it is difficult to reconcile

with the existence of the axillary bodies. We suspect it is better, in the present state of ournbsp;knowledge, to hazard no conjecture upon thenbsp;subject.

B. grandis. Sternb. essai d�un expos� g�ognostico-hotanique. fuse. 4. p. 30. t. 4{).f. 1.

M. Ad. Brongniart refers this to his genus Asterophyllites, among the doubtful species. We,nbsp;iiowever, think it better to preserve Count Stern-�s name, because it is scarcely to be doubted,nbsp;that although it agrees with Asterophyllites in itsnbsp;'�srticillate leaves, it will prove, when betternbsp;^Hown, to be something widely different. Thisnbsp;indicated by its tumid joints, and deeply butnbsp;quot;widely furrowed stems, characters that are sonbsp;^iistiuctly marked, as to render it probable, thatnbsp;texture was firmer, and its constitution dif-i^rent, from that of the other plants referred to

Asterophyllites.

The leaves in this specimen are almost destroyed ; but they appear, from Count Sternberg�s figure, to be short, slender, pointed^ and about four in a whorl.

No reasonable conjecture can be offered as to the affinity of this fossil and recent plants, untilnbsp;some more distinct information shall have beennbsp;procured respecting its other states.

ASTEROPHYLLITES GRANDIS.

This represents the leaves of fhe fossil, figured at plate 17. They appear to have been aboutnbsp;14 in a whorl, very narrow, subulate, rathernbsp;rigid, and perfectly distinct to the base. Thenbsp;stem was finely striated, and the joints not tumid.

LEPIDODENDRON OBOVATUM.

^bovatum. Stemberg, essai cah. 1. p.21. t.S.f.l, and 8. f.\,a. Ad. Brongn. prodr. p. 86.

This is evidently the same species as that found Count Sternberg in the coal mines of Radnitz;nbsp;was, probably, a tree of considerable size.nbsp;Specimens of a neighbouring species, L. acule-^tum, were found in the same place, sixteen inchesnbsp;diameter, at the lower end, {Sternb.^; but thesenbsp;Were even pigmies when compared with some thatnbsp;Occasionally appear in the northern coal minesnbsp;of this country. Portions of Lepidodendron havenbsp;lgt;een there met with, in the roofs of the mines,nbsp;from 20 to 45 feet long, and as much as four feetnbsp;and a half in diameter.

It is perfectly distinguished by its obovate areolae, of which the apex is rounded, the basenbsp;tapering, the central ridge even and undivided, andnbsp;the scar at the very apex of the areola boundednbsp;by a nearly circular outline.

Specimens of this kind are veiy common in nodules of carbonate of iron lying among the shalenbsp;in the coal measures ; those now figured are fromnbsp;the roof of the Bensham coal seam, at Jarrow.

have several others from the coalfield of Barnsley, for which we are indebted to Mr. Edgar.

Their appearance is that of a circular flat body, ^ith a crenated margin, from the re-enteringnbsp;nngles of which run simple lines, converging to-'vards the centre, but uniformly stopping short ofnbsp;it- In the specimens figured, they are but justnbsp;'vithin the margin; in others, they are equal tonbsp;*nnre than two-thirds of the whole diameter. Innbsp;tite latter case, they have very much the appearance of the recent fern, called Trichomanes reni-nrnre, from which, however, they are distin-Snishable by their lines not being dichotomous.^

j ^ �P6cinien of this kind formerly led me to suppose that I Bfietwitha fossil instance, either of Trichomanes reniforme,

No one would suspect what these fossils are, from an examination of such specimens as thosenbsp;now figured ; they are proved by other instancesnbsp;to be nothing more than casts of the supposednbsp;partition, or phragma of the stem of some Calamite,nbsp;of which two internodia have separated from eachnbsp;other. The crenatures are sections of the parallelnbsp;striae, and the converging lines are continuous withnbsp;the furrows.

It is, perhaps, impossible, in the actual state of our knowledge of these plants, to tell whethernbsp;the converging lines are horizontal vessels, or thenbsp;ends of vertical plates, analogous to medullarynbsp;rays. Supposing Calamites to have thin phragmata,nbsp;the former would be most likely, although thenbsp;absence of ramifications is a very unusual featurenbsp;in veins ; but in the event of the supposed phragmata turning out to be disarticulated portions ofnbsp;wood, in that case, it may be expected, that theynbsp;would indicate medullary rays ; to which the circumstance of several lines occasionally runningnbsp;or of some species very nearly related to it. I took the crenatures for the remains of marginal fructification, and the linesnbsp;for veins; an error from which I did not escape, until after anbsp;paper upon the subject had been read before the Geologicalnbsp;Society. My mistake was pointed out to me by Mr. Robertnbsp;Brown, who, when I first communicated to him my fossil,nbsp;appeared to entertain the same opinion with myself; but who,nbsp;after the paper was read, shewed me a proof of its being reallynbsp;the phragma of a Calamite. J. L.

We have no means of offering even a conjecture as to the species to which these fragments belong.

This is no doubt a portion of a Calamites, which has been struck perpendicularly so as to separatenbsp;it into many portions. Whether it was a youngnbsp;stem, that had acquired no strength, or solidity,nbsp;or whether it was a part of its cortical integumentnbsp;only, or whether, finally, it was an old stem,nbsp;�which had, previous to the crushing, been sonbsp;much rotted, as to separate into several layers,nbsp;like the stems of many of our recent herbaceousnbsp;plants, it seems impossible to say.

^0 publish it chiefly, because any fact that connected with the illustration of the organization of this extensive fossil genus, is of toonbsp;much importance to be lost sight of.

CALAMITES MOUGEOTI�.

Calamites Mougeot�. Ad. Brongn. hist, des V�g�tauxfos-siles, vol. 1. p. 137. t. 25. �. 4�5. Annales des sciences, vol. 15. p. 438.

Copied from a drawing furnished for this work by Henry Witham, Esq. of a fine specimennbsp;in his collection, from the sandstone of thenbsp;Edinburgh coalfield. The figure is one half thenbsp;natural size.

In this instance we have the mode of branching peculiar to Calamites distinctly ascertained. Thenbsp;branches proceed from the nodi, gradually thickennbsp;as they lengthen, and afterwards taper off, sonbsp;that the diameter of the two extremities is muchnbsp;less than that of the centre. In this respectnbsp;Calamites resembles those recent Endogenousnbsp;plants, which, like the Arrow-root, or some Cy-peracese, emit subterranean stolones; and alsonbsp;differs from Equisetum, in which the young shoots

One of the branches on the left of our figure is divided, and seems as if the young lateral shootnbsp;emitted by it had a gradually attenuated termination. There is no trace of leaves upon any partnbsp;of the specimen.

Although this is from the sandstone of the Edinburgh coal formation, yet it appears undis-tinguishable from C. Mougeotii, one of the fewnbsp;plants described from the new red sandstone ofnbsp;the Vosges by Mons. Adolphe Brongniart.

23�24

This fossil was found in a sandstone quarry at Hill Top, near Ushaw, about four miles northnbsp;west of the city of Durham. Unfortunately itnbsp;was not in situ, but laid among the refuse of thenbsp;quarry in a multitude of fragments, none ofnbsp;which were more than six inches in size ; and whichnbsp;have been ascertained by Mr. Witham to havenbsp;belonged to more than one species. The bed ofnbsp;sandstone is of the coal formation proper, andnbsp;rather high in the series; a coal mine is workednbsp;beneath it, which is probably the Shield Rownbsp;seam, as it is called in that division of the northernnbsp;Coalfield.

Another specimen, in the state of a rolled fragment, was found by Dr. Youens in a brooknbsp;near Ushaw ; and Mr. Witham picked anothernbsp;from a stone-heap by the road side.

The polished slices from which the drawings were taken, were communicated by the highlynbsp;valued correspondent after whom we have namednbsp;the species.

The transverse section (tab. 23.) offers to the naked eye a fibrous undulated surface, with several concentric lines of a deeper colour, at unequalnbsp;and irregular distances (a a a, fig. 1.) ; but these,nbsp;when examined by the microscope, are found notnbsp;to be the concentric circles of an Exogenousnbsp;plant, but to be merely waves, or slight alterations in the direction of the tissue of the fossilnbsp;(see �, fig. 2.) Viewed by transmitted light beneath a magnifying power of 180, the appearancenbsp;is such as is represented at fig. 2.; the tissue,nbsp;which consists of the unequal elongated cellulesnbsp;of Coniferse crossed by medullary rays, being displaced in many places by a deposit of inorganicnbsp;semitransparent matter. The general characternbsp;of this section is so much that of the Craigleithnbsp;Fos.sil (Pinites Withami, tab. 2.) that it would benbsp;difficult to distinguish them. Like it, there is nonbsp;trace of any concentric zones in a slice morenbsp;than two inches across.

But in a longitudinal section (tab. 24.) the resemblance between these two entirely ceases.nbsp;Instead of the finely reticulated structure of thenbsp;walls of the cells of Pinites Withami, and whichnbsp;are peculiar to the genus Pinites, we have cellsnbsp;with a character entirely that of many Coniferee ofnbsp;the present day; as, for example, of Pinus Stro-bus. The walls of the cells appear, under anbsp;power of 180 (tab. 24. fig. 1.) to have here andnbsp;there upon their surface small roundish or ovalnbsp;areolae lying either in single rows, or in two rows,

side by side, never occupying the whole of a cell, but crowded irregularly towards one of its extremities, and often having themselves the appearance of having been pushed from their places bynbsp;violence. Still more highly magnified, as atnbsp;fig. 2., where a power of 500 is employed, manynbsp;of these areolae are distinctly seen to have a minute central circle, which is sometimes opaque,nbsp;like the areolae themselves, and occasionally transparent ; when, if this happens upon an opaquenbsp;areola, it looks like a small hole. The greaternbsp;part of the areolae are opaque, like the walls ofnbsp;the cellules, but some of them are transparent;nbsp;and these latter may be observed, by the reflection of the light thrown upon them from the mirrornbsp;of the microscope, not to be plane, but to benbsp;slightly convex. All this (with the exception ofnbsp;the areolae being often in two parallel rows uponnbsp;the walls of the cells, and in contact with eachnbsp;other,) is so like that of Pinus Strobus, that nonbsp;reasonable doubt can be entertained of this fossilnbsp;being really a part of some tree analogous to recent Conifer�. To distinguish it from Pinites,nbsp;'^'^hich, as we have already shewn, can only benbsp;considered an approximation to Conifer�, thenbsp;name Pence has suggested itself, that of Pinusnbsp;having been already applied to certain fossil conesnbsp;found in formations of a date much more recentnbsp;than the coal measures. Pence will stand for thenbsp;generic title of all fossil wood that appears absolutely coniferous.

We are acquainted with no recent species in which either the areolae of the tissue occupy twonbsp;collateral rows upon the walls, or where there isnbsp;no trace of concentric circles in so large a spacenbsp;as two inches across.

ASTEROPHYLLITES FOLIOSA.

This was a tall branching plant, with long slender shoots, which were rather thicker at the base than at the apex. The nodi were scarcelynbsp;at all tumid, and the internodia very slightlynbsp;striated. The leaves grew 8 or 10 in a whorl,nbsp;were perfectly distinct at their base, a littlenbsp;shorter than the internodia, and of a linear-lanceolate figure, with a slightly falcate direction.nbsp;There seems to have been a midrib; but this isnbsp;so imperfectly indicated, that nothing certain cannbsp;he determined about it. No trace of fructification has been found.

At first sight, this seems to resemble some species of Asparagus; but, upon a more carefulnbsp;comparison, it will be found, that, while thenbsp;branches of this are opposite, those of Asparagusnbsp;are alternate ; and that the leaves of the latter,nbsp;although seemingly verticillate, are, in reality.

fasciculate, and alternate; or, in other words, grow in clusters from alternate points of the stem.

It is much more probable that this fossil, like the next, was of the same nature as our modernnbsp;Stellatse ;¹ from which we can only distinguishnbsp;it in its actual state, by the want of sharp anglesnbsp;to the stem.

From Asterophyllites equisetiformis, it differs in its leaves not being more than one half thenbsp;length ; from A. rigida, in the same circumstance,nbsp;and in their being broader in proportion to theirnbsp;length; and from A. diffusa, in their being muchnbsp;longer, and larger.

Our specimen occurs among the remains of ferns, in fragments like that represented at fig. 2.nbsp;No stem is visible. The leaves were in whorlsnbsp;of 10, had a lanceolate figure, were very acutenbsp;at the apex, and had a distinct midrib, withoutnbsp;a trace of lateral veins. Fig. 2 a, represents onenbsp;of the most perfect of these leaves magnified; thenbsp;specimen itself is of the natural size.

This is so very like some recent species of Galium, such as G. maritimum and murale, that it isnbsp;scarcely possible to doubt its having been, atnbsp;least, nearly related to them; and if any minutenbsp;projecting points could be discovered upon thenbsp;margin, or midrib, the identity would be almostnbsp;established. In the mean while, we refer it to

the heterogeneous assemblage called Asterophylli-tes, because it is impracticable, from the imperfect state of our materials, to fix upon any generic characters by which the verticillate leaved fossilsnbsp;of this kind can be satisfactorily disunited.

v gt; /

Lepidostrobus ornatus. Ad. Brongn. piodr. p. 87. Parkinson�s Organic remains, vol. 1. to�. 9. �. 1-

From the shale of the Barnsley coalfield, whence our specimen has been kindly sent, bynbsp;Mr. Edgar.

This, the original species upon which Mons. Ad. Brongniart has chiefly founded his genusnbsp;Lepidostrobus, can scarcely be distinguished,nbsp;generically, from the fossils figured at our t. 10.nbsp;and 11., under the name of L. variabilis; and yetnbsp;it exhibits some striking marks of difference. Itnbsp;evidently was a cone, or strobilus, and consistednbsp;of a number of woody plates, or scales, originatingnbsp;in the surface of a central woody axis, of an elongated conical, or almost cylindrical figure, spreading nearly horizontally, turning backwards towardsnbsp;the point of the cone at their extremities, andnbsp;enclosing organs of fructification. From the scarsnbsp;left upon the surface of this central axis, it is

certain that the scales, notwithstanding their apparent breadth, originated from a small roundish base; and that they had, also, a spiral arrangement. The recurved points of the scales seem tonbsp;have formed rhomboids transverse with regard tonbsp;the axis of the cone.

All these things are visible in the accompanying plate, in which fig. 1. is a portion of the upper end of a cone, of the natural size, lying imbedded in its stone, upon whieh the marks of the ends of the scales are impressed; and fig. 2.nbsp;is the same portion of the cone separated from itsnbsp;bed, and magnified.

If the impressions of the origin of the scales upon the central axis be compared with those of any ofnbsp;the Pine tribe, in which the scales of the cone arenbsp;deciduous, such as the Silver Fir, no one can failnbsp;to remark their general identity, as far as ournbsp;means of comparison extend ; but we can scarcelynbsp;say that the resemblance goes further; and wenbsp;certainly should not be justified in asserting, fromnbsp;what we at present know, that the structure ofnbsp;the organs of fructification enclosed between thenbsp;scales of the cone, is the same as that of modernnbsp;Coniferm. In the conebearing genera of thenbsp;latter, there are generally two short naked wingednbsp;seeds, lying above each scale; and immediatelynbsp;upon the seeds, reposes the bracteal leaf that subtends each scale. But here it would seem, as if,nbsp;between the scales, were enclosed several membranes, or leaves; and the seeds, of which we

have fortunately discovered one, in situ, (see fig. 2. �.), were oblong bodies, nearly as long asnbsp;the scales, and, most probably, altogether destitute of a wing. From the extremely brittle andnbsp;mouldering state of the specimen we are nownbsp;describing, we regret that we are unable to speaknbsp;more exactly upon the subject. As these fossilsnbsp;are far from uncommon, we do trust that some ofnbsp;our friends will be able to discover the cones, notnbsp;only in a still better state, but actually in connection with the leaves to which they belong. Thatnbsp;the latter are well known, can hardly be doubted.

Sphenophyllum Schlotheimii. Ad. Brongn. prodr. p. 68. Palmacites verticillatus. Schlotheim Flora der Vorvelt,nbsp;t. 2. �. 24.

At page 41, we alluded to the existence, in the cabinet of the Geological Society, of fine specimens of this fossil, sent from the Somersetnbsp;coalfield, by the Rev. Mr. Skinner. By thenbsp;permission' of the Society, we are enabled tonbsp;publish the accompanying representation of thesenbsp;curious remains.

The stems appear to have been branched, and deeply channelled, the projecting ribs corresponding with the base of the leaves; the internodianbsp;were rather shorter than the leaves. The leavesnbsp;Were whorled, and from six to nine in each verti-cillus; they probably spread nearly horizontally ;nbsp;m figure they were exactly cuneate; their apexnbsp;Was transversely truncate, and finely crenated.

with a very slight appearance of an emargination in the centre ; the veins were dichotomouslynbsp;branched, and uniformly terminated in the sinusesnbsp;of the crenatures of the apex; the sides of thenbsp;leaves were perfectly straight and undivided. Atnbsp;the base of the leaves, are here and there to benbsp;found obscure traces of what seem to have beennbsp;scales; but they are so imperfectly seen, that itnbsp;is impossible to speak with confidence of theirnbsp;nature. No trace of any thing like fructificationnbsp;is discernable.

In the drawing, fig. 1. represents a portion of the fossil of its natural size, and fig. 2. a singlenbsp;leaf apart, and magnified so as to shew the veinsnbsp;distinctly.

We have already, in speaking of Sphenophyllum erosum, t, 13., adverted to the possibility of thisnbsp;fossil having more relation to Coniferae than tonbsp;any other recent family. In illustration of thisnbsp;suggestion, a drawing of a leaf of Salisburianbsp;adiantifolia, (fig. 3.) has been added to thisnbsp;plate, for the purpose of showing the great similarity in the arrangement of its veins. We confess we have no better arguments to offer upon thisnbsp;subject than those formerly adduced, but we stillnbsp;think them sufficiently powerful to render it improbable that Sphenophyllum belonged to Mar-sileaceas, even if its approximation to Coniferaenbsp;should be rejected. Like all other questions innbsp;this department of science, nothing can positivelynbsp;be determined until fructification shall have been

Schlotheim asserts, that the leaves in his plant are always in sixes, and he so represents them :nbsp;he also makes them have an entire roundish extremity. If these characters could be considerednbsp;constant, his plant would be a different speciesnbsp;from ours. We confess, however, that we distrust such supposed differences too far, to form anbsp;Dew species, when the general resemblance is sonbsp;great. The conjecture of the learned German,nbsp;that Sphenophyllum was of the Palm kind, seemsnbsp;by no means probable.

28�29

NCEGGETIATHIA FLABELLATA.

Found, occasionally, in the shale, covering the Bensham seam of coal, in Jarrow Colliery. Tab 28.nbsp;represents a leaf, one third the natural size ; tab. 29.nbsp;is a detached leaflet of the size of nature.

Palms are so rare in the coal measures, that only one certain species, the Noeggerathia foliosanbsp;of Count Sternberg, of which a single specimennbsp;from Bohemia is in the Museum at Prague, hasnbsp;been discovered in Europe. We are so fortunatenbsp;as to add another, which is referable to the samenbsp;genus, but which is very distinct from Countnbsp;Sternberg�s plant.

A portion of a compound leaf, and a few scattered pinnae, are all that have been met with. The leaf appears to have consisted of 6 or 7, ornbsp;perhaps more, pairs of leaflets, which becamenbsp;generally smaller towards the extremity of thenbsp;leaf; the midrib has not been distinguished. Thenbsp;most perfect pinnae are cuneate, taper very muchnbsp;to the base, have a dilated, undulated, slightlynbsp;lobed, crenated extremity, and appear to have

been flabelliform; others are narrower, and look like split portions of larger pinnae, which, perhaps,nbsp;they are.

That this is not a fern, is obvious from the veins not being distinctly dichotomous, but graduallynbsp;separating, imperceptibly, as the pinnae widennbsp;from the base, without any obviously marked pointnbsp;of divergence. Single pinnae may, by this character, be safely distinguished from specimens ofnbsp;what Mods. Brongniart calls Cyclopteris digitata,¹nbsp;or similar plants.

The name Noeggerathia was given by Count Sternberg, in honour of Dr. Nceggerath, who hasnbsp;occupied himself specially in the study of fossilnbsp;trees, and from whom much valuable informationnbsp;upon the subject is one day to be expected.

Compare the figure of this in the BListoire des V�g�taux fossiles, t. 61. bis fig. 2., with that of Salisburia adiantifolia,

For the preparation from which the annexed figure has been taken, we are indebted to Mr.nbsp;Uitham, by whom it was first described andnbsp;figured in the work above referred to.

The bed to which this fossil belongs is not quite certain; but is supposed to belong � tonbsp;the upper strata of the great Oolitic series.

Witham obtained it � from the base of the Magnificent mural escarpment of the Scuir ofnbsp;^�ggt;� one of the Inner Hebrides,nbsp;in structure, it is obviously different from anynbsp;the Coal Coniferae ; its medullary rays appearnbsp;to be more numerous, and frequently are notnbsp;continued through from one zone of wood tonbsp;another, but more generally terminate at thenbsp;concentric circles; it abounds in Turpentinenbsp;Vessels, or lacunae of various sizes, the sides of

which are very distinctly defined ; and here and there, rows of flattened tubes are found amongnbsp;the ordinary cylindrical woody tissue. Thesenbsp;are distinctly visible in a cross section.

This forms one of the proofs, of which so many have now accumulated, that Dicotyledonousnbsp;plants existed during the period of the Ooliticnbsp;formation; and there seems to be no want ofnbsp;evidence to shew, that the earliest remains ofnbsp;land plants consist, more or less, of the highestnbsp;orders of vegetables. It is, however, very remarkable, that, hitherto, no other kind of woodnbsp;than the Coniferous should have been discoverednbsp;in the older fossiliferous rocks, and that no positive trace of any other kind of Dicotyledonousnbsp;tree should have been discovered earlier thannbsp;the Lias.

We have not met with any recent plant of the same order, with the wood of which this cannbsp;be considered identical.

Fig. 1. is a representation of a transverse slice the natural size; it is of a deep rich brown,nbsp;which cannot be expressed without colour.

Fig. 2. is a small portion of the same, magnified 180 diameters; the larger oval, or round spaces, are the mouths of lacunae; in the secondnbsp;zone of wood, from the bottom, are two rowsnbsp;of the flattened tubes, above alluded to; a thirdnbsp;may be perceived, on the right of the third zonenbsp;from the bottom.

J %� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'t' 'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;fie-'. ^��nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;i- � '-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;L �nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^

� . nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;? T',^-*nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;*nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'^*'�' -Ma Inbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;-quot;1nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;gt;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;iL-.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'i^,

T nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;H'. ^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;, �gt;'*gt;-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ �, .mi�iiii- I !

�i w �i,^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'3? K.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�'� -J-ijaaM^*-^'�

I'M '* 1quot;*

�*��

^�**j iii'du

\lt;�*4

.Tr*-/� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;*

w, ^

p)0 m k'm^t

31�36

� Schistus variolis depressis; schistus variolis elevatis Mo-fand, die kunst auf Steinkohlen zu bauen, t. 9. �. 3�4.�

� Lithophyllum opunti� majoris facie. Volkm. Siles. siibterr. P-106. f. 11. �. 1.�

� Cyliiidrus lapideus Byerleus compressior echinites lati-�^lavii maximi facie, acetabulis rotuadis e puteiscarbonariis prope �^yeiley in Yorkshire. Petiv. gazoph, dec. 2. 1.18. �. 11.�

Phytolithus verrucosus. Martin Petrificata Derbyensia, 'ptate 11, 12, 13. Parkinson�s Organic Remains, vol. 1. platenbsp;�� 1. Steinkauer in Am. Phil. Tra,ns. N.S. vol. 1. p, 268.nbsp;t. 4. � i_6.

^ligmaria ficoides. Ad. Brongn. in Mem. Mus. vol. 8.1.12. �� 7. Prodr. p. 88.

One of the most common, if not the most common, of the fossil vegetables of. the Coalnbsp;formation, is that now represented; which has,nbsp;its long list of synonyms indicates, been fre-

I 2

quently before the subject of description. As the great multitude of its fragments, that are stillnbsp;every where to be found, assure us, that it mustnbsp;have formed a striking feature in primaeval vegetation, we shall dwell at more than usual lengthnbsp;upon its structure, and supposed affinities. Butnbsp;before we proceed to state our own notions uponnbsp;the subject, we shall quote Mr. Steinhauer�s ingenious paper in the first volume of the newnbsp;series of the American Philosophical Transactions;nbsp;which, although erroneous in some respects, is bynbsp;far the best account of the plant that has yetnbsp;appeared.

� The fossil which has received the name of Phytolithus Verrucosus from the ingenious authornbsp;of the Petrificata Derbiensia, is by far the mostnbsp;common, and, perhaps, the most remarkable ofnbsp;this class. Woodward seems already to havenbsp;collected numerous specimens, notwithstandingnbsp;their bulk and comparative unsightliness; (Catalogue of English Fossils, vol. i. part ii. p. 104.nbsp;A'ol. ii. p. 59, amp;c.) and Mr. Parkinson has exercisednbsp;considerable, though fruitless ingenuity, in elucidating them. It might appear presumptuous, afternbsp;the labours of men of such distinguished abilities,nbsp;to obtrude to public notice any further remarks,nbsp;had not these authors left abundant room for observation, which place of abode and inclinationnbsp;have enabled the writer to pursue, during a seriesnbsp;of several years. Within this period we have collected several hundred specimens, worked many

from the bed of clay in which they were imbedded, and examined in quarries, on coalpit hills, among heaps of stone by the road side, and innbsp;various other situations, several thousand. Thenbsp;Geological situation of this fossil is well knownnbsp;to be the coal strata, in almost all which, as far asnbsp;the writer is enabled to judge, it is found. Itsnbsp;geographical habitats in these strata, may benbsp;partly collected from the works already quoted;nbsp;the specimens more immediately examined werenbsp;found in the neighbourhood of Fulneck, nearnbsp;Leeds, or in the space included by the towns ofnbsp;Leeds, Otley, Bradford, Halifax, Huddersfield, andnbsp;Wakefield ; but we have also found it on the top ofnbsp;logleborough, in the coal strata of Northumberland; abundantly in Derbyshire; at Dudley, innbsp;Shropshire, and in the neighbourhood of Bristol,nbsp;^ith respect to mineralogical constituent matter,nbsp;If seems always to coincide with that of the stra-fam in which it is imbedded, with a slight modification of density.

� It is most abundant in the fine grained siliceous stone, provincially called Calliard and Gannister,nbsp;and in some of the coal Binds or Crowstones, whichnbsp;bave probably received this appellation from spotsnbsp;af bitumen, or coal attached to these petrifac-bons. It is rather less frequent in the beds ofnbsp;scaly clay, or clay mixed with siliceous sand andnbsp;mica; very common but completely compressednbsp;*a the coal shales, or bituminous slate clay; ofnbsp;occasional occurrence in the argillaceous iron

stone; not rare in the common grit, and upper thick beds of argillaceomicaceous sand stone ornbsp;rag, and sometimes, though rarely, discoverable innbsp;the coal itself. Mr. White Watson, of Bakewell,nbsp;had also in his collection which we examined, anbsp;specimen in the Derbyshire Toadstone or Trap,nbsp;and we have also noticed it in the limestone behind the Bristol Hot Wells, at its junction withnbsp;the sand stone. So immense, however, is thenbsp;number of relics, that when the eye has beennbsp;accustomed to catch their appearance, it is scarcelynbsp;possible to walk a furlong in the districts wherenbsp;they are at home, without meeting them in onenbsp;shape or another. The most perfect form in whichnbsp;this fossil occurs, is that of a cylinder, more ornbsp;less compressed, and generally flatter on one sidenbsp;than the other, (Plate IV. fig. 1 and 2.) Not un-frequently, the flattened side turns in so as tonbsp;form a groove. The surface is marked in quin-cuncial order with pustules, or rather depressednbsp;areolae, with a rising in the middle, in the centrenbsp;of which rising a minute speck is often observable. From different modes and degrees ofnbsp;compression, and, probably, from different statesnbsp;of the original vegetable, these areolae assumenbsp;very different appearances, sometimes runningnbsp;into indistinct rimae, like the bark of an agednbsp;willow, sometimes, as in the shale impressions,nbsp;exhibiting little more than a neat sketch of thenbsp;concentric circles. Mr. Martin suspected thatnbsp;these pustules were the marks of the attachment

of the peduncles of leaves; and his Tab. XII. represents a specimen, in which he thought thatnbsp;he had discovered the reliquia of the leavesnbsp;themselves. We have examined the specimen,nbsp;whence the drawing, which is extremely correct, was made; but are convinced, that Mr.nbsp;Martin was misled by an accidental compression,nbsp;in describing these leaves as being flat. Numerous specimens in gannister, in which the lateralnbsp;compression of the trunk is generally trifling,nbsp;place the assertion beyond a doubt, that thenbsp;fibrous processes, acini, spines, or whatever elsenbsp;they may be called, are cylindrical; and smallnbsp;fragments of these cylinders shew distinctly anbsp;central line, (pith?), coinciding with the pointnbsp;in the centre of the pustule. Convinced of thenbsp;existence of these fibres, we were soon able tonbsp;detect their remains forming considerable massesnbsp;of stone, particularly of Coal Bind on Wibseynbsp;Slack, and at Lower Wyke, where their contorted figure imitates the figures of Serpulae; butnbsp;it excited much surprise on examining the projecting ends of some trunks, which lay horizontally in a bed of clay, extending along the southern bank of the rivulet which separates thenbsp;townships of Pudsey and Tong, and which isnbsp;exposed, in several places, to find traces of thesenbsp;fibres, proceeding from the central cylinder, innbsp;rays through the stratum, in every direction, tonbsp;the distance of above twenty feet. Repeated observations, and the concurrent conviction of un-

prejudiced persons, made attentive to the phenomenon, compelled the belief, that they, originally, belonged to the trunks in question; and, consequently, that the vegetable grew in itsnbsp;present horizontal position, at a time that thenbsp;stratum was in a state capable of supporting-its vegetation, and shot out its fibres in everynbsp;direction through the then yielding mud. Fornbsp;if it grew erect, even admitting the fibres to havenbsp;been as rigid as the firmest spines with whichnbsp;we are acquainted, it would be difficult to devise means gentle enough to bring it into a recumbent posture, without deranging their position. This supposition gains strength from thenbsp;circumstance, that they are found lying in allnbsp;directions across one another, and not directednbsp;towards any particular point of the compass.

� The flattened and sometimes grooved form of one side of the cylinder has already been noticed.nbsp;Woodward already observed, that along this side,nbsp;there generally, or at least, frequently, ran an included cylinder, which at one extremity of thenbsp;specimen would approach the outside, so as almostnbsp;to leave the trunk, while, at the other, it seemednbsp;nearly central. A reference to his Catalogue,nbsp;vol. 1. part 2, p. 104, to Mr. Parkinson�s Organicnbsp;Remains, vol. 1. p. 427, and to Martin�s Petrifi-cata Derbiensia, I. c. will show how much thisnbsp;included cylinder has embarrassed those whonbsp;have considered it with a view to the vegetablenbsp;organ to which it owes its origin. In the spe-

citnens in Calliard, which have suffered little compression, but which are seldom above a few inches in length, this body is generally nearly central;nbsp;perhaps, in no instance, perfectly lateral. In thenbsp;Specimens in clay, from one of which we are ablenbsp;fo detach upwards of six feet, the flattened ornbsp;grooved side is invariably downward, and, consequently, the included cylinder in the positionnbsp;i^hich it would assume, if it had subsided at onenbsp;end, while the other was supported, or whichnbsp;^ould be the result of its sinking through anbsp;medium of nearly the same specific gravity withnbsp;itself, provided it was at one end rather densernbsp;fhan at the other. It must be observed, that thisnbsp;included body appears to have suffered variousnbsp;degrees of compression, being sometimes cylindrical, which was evidently its original form, andnbsp;�Sometimes almost entirely flattened. In the coalnbsp;shale we were never able to detect a trace of itsnbsp;existence.

� Besides these indications of organization, we have met with several specimens, which, on beingnbsp;longitudinally split, discovered marks of perfora-fions or fibres, more or less parallel with the axisnbsp;nf the cylinder, and, in some degree, resemblingnbsp;the perforations of Terebellae, in the fossil wood ofnbsp;ighgate, and some other places. Whether thesenbsp;Configurations be owing to the organization of thenbsp;criginal vegetable, or to some process which itnbsp;^uderwent during its decay, seems impossible tonbsp;etermine. The specimens examined, afforded no

opportunity of discovering a connection between these tubes, and either the internal cylinders ornbsp;the external surface.

� Among the vast number of specimens examined, only one was detected, which appeared to terminate, closing from a thickness of three inchesnbsp;to an obtuse point. Two instances also came tonbsp;our knowledge of branched specimens, in whichnbsp;the trunk divided into two nearly equal branches.nbsp;So rare an occurrence of this circumstancenbsp;would, however, rather induce the suppositionnbsp;that the original was properly simple, and thatnbsp;these were only exceptions or monstrosities. Thenbsp;size of different specimens vary greatly, but wenbsp;have seen none under two inches in diameter ; thenbsp;general size is three or four, and some occur, butnbsp;with very indistinct traces of the pustules, evennbsp;12 inches across.

� From the above, it appears rational to suppose that the original was a cylindrical trunk or root,nbsp;growing in a direction nearly horizontal, in thenbsp;soft mud at the bottom of fresh water lakes ornbsp;seas, without branches, but sending out fibresnbsp;from all sides. That it was furnished in thenbsp;centre with a pith of a structure, different fromnbsp;the surrounding wood or cellular substance, morenbsp;dense and distinct at the older end of the plant,nbsp;and more similar to the external substance, towards the termination which continued to shoot.nbsp;And, perhaps, that besides this central pith,nbsp;there were longitudinal fibres proceeding through

the plant, like those in the roots of Pteris aqui-lina. With respect to any stem arising from it, if a root, or foliage belonging to it, if a creep-,nbsp;ing trunk, we have hardly ground for a supposition.

� If these points be assumed as ascertained, the manner in which the reliquia were formed, isnbsp;easily accounted for. Annual decay, or an accumulation of incumbent mud having deprived thenbsp;trunk of the vegetating principle, the clay wouldnbsp;be condensed by superior pressure around thenbsp;dead plant, so as to form a species of matrix. Ifnbsp;this took place so rapidly, that the mould had obtained a considerable degree of consistency beforenbsp;the texture of the vegetable was destroyed bynbsp;putrefaction, the reliquium was cylindrical; if, onnbsp;the contrary, the new formed stratum continuednbsp;to subside, while the decomposition was going on,nbsp;it became flattened, and the inferior part mightnbsp;even be raised up towards the yielding substancenbsp;in the inside, so as to produce the groove or crest,nbsp;as Woodward calls it, on the under side, in thenbsp;same manner as the floor in coal works is apt tonbsp;�'ise where the measures are soft, and the roof andnbsp;sides have been secured. While the principalnbsp;mass of the plant was reduced to a soft state, andnbsp;gradually carried away, or assimulated withnbsp;mineral infiltrated matter, the central pith, beingnbsp;unsupported, would sink towards the underside,nbsp;and this the more sensibly where its texture wasnbsp;most distinct, while its anterior extremity would.

probably, go into putrefaction with, and be lost in the more tender part of the plant. The mineralnbsp;matter introduced would now form an envelopenbsp;round the pith, where this resisted decompositionnbsp;for a sufficient length of time, and when it wasnbsp;ultimately removed, if the surrounding mass wasnbsp;still sufficiently pervious, be also filled with argillaceous matter; or, if it was too much indurated, be left empty, which is the case occasionally. The epidermis or external integumentnbsp;of the vegetable, appears to have resisted decomposition the longest, as in many cases it has beennbsp;preserved from putrefaction, in the manner necessary to change it into coal: its place more frequently, however, is occupied by a ferrugineousnbsp;micaceous film. It, therefore, appears, that thenbsp;original plants must have undergone a destructionnbsp;by putrefaction, and the vacuities thus occasionednbsp;been very rapidly filled with mineral matter.nbsp;This is evident from the reliquium, in its presentnbsp;state, exhibiting no minute traces of organization,nbsp;nor any signs of bituminized vegetable matter, sonbsp;frequent in siliceous and opaline wood, except innbsp;the epidermis, and from the close similarity whichnbsp;this substance bears with that of the surroundingnbsp;stratum; whereas, in shells, amp;c, which have evidently undergone a very gradual lapidifying process, there is generally a very perceptible difference between the matter substituted and thenbsp;surrounding mass.

of Geology, will readily be drawn. The formation of these strata, from the deposit of water, is clearlynbsp;ascertained ; also, that the argillaceous strata innbsp;question, must have been, when originally deposited, of nearly the same thickness as they nownbsp;are, as appears from the undisturbed position ofnbsp;the vegetables of which they were once the bed,nbsp;and are now the tomb. On the other hand, thenbsp;shale of coal or slate clay, appears to have originated from a great number of successive depositions, which must have been of a very dilutednbsp;consistence, when vegetation became extinct innbsp;the plants of which they now bear the impressions. All these strata must be supposed to havenbsp;heen successively at no great depth from the surface of the water resting upon them, that thesenbsp;plants might be supplied with air ; and the situation in which they are found, precludes the possibility of any motion of that sea sufficiently violentnbsp;to disturb the bottom. The general diffusion ofnbsp;this, and several of the following species, stronglynbsp;suggests the belief, that all the coal strata throughnbsp;which they are dispersed, owe their existence to anbsp;similar ori'^in.�

Count Sternberg, in describing it from the mines of Radnitz, adverted to its affinity with Euphor-biacem, or Cacti.

M. Adolphe Brongniart, in his paper in the Memoires du Mus�um, objects to this affinity, andnbsp;suggested that it belonged rather to the family of

Aroidese; an idea which, we confess, appears to us by no means well founded. In his last work,nbsp;he refers the genus to Lycopodiacese, an opinionnbsp;in which we are equally unable to concur. Mr.nbsp;Artis adopts Count Sternberg�s suggestion, that itnbsp;was akin to Cacteas.

Having prefaced thus much, we will next proceed to describe the accompanying plates; and then tonbsp;see how far they corroborate or contradict Mr.nbsp;Steinhauer�s opinions.

Plate 31, fig. 1, represents the appearance of a nearly perfect specimen of this species, as it wasnbsp;laid bare by a fall of shale from the roof of thenbsp;Bensham coal-seam in Jarrow Colliery. It is viewed from below, and, consequently, represents thenbsp;under side. The central part, three feet in diameter, is coneave; the whole surface being verynbsp;distinctly covered with wrinkles, which, whennbsp;attentively examined, are seen to be caused bynbsp;depressed semicircular spots, compactly arrangednbsp;in a spiral manner; in the centre of which is anbsp;roundish scar, to which a little fine coaly matternbsp;usually adheres. From this centre, arms, twelvenbsp;in number, proceed on all sides; every one, whennbsp;seen of length sufficient, dividing into two branches.nbsp;The whole plant is flattened. As we recede fromnbsp;the centre, and approach the fore part of the arms,nbsp;the circular tubercles, so well known, becomenbsp;more distinctly marked; and upon all the branchesnbsp;the leaf-like bodies remain attached. Upon several of the arms, the course of an internal central

axis could be traced by a furrow, or depression in the fossil, as represented in the drawing.

Two other entire individuals have occurred, one of which having fallen whole from the roof, afforded an opportunity of examining the upper surface of the arms, which exhibited all the wellnbsp;known characters of the fossil; but the uppernbsp;part of the centre itself was too much damaged tonbsp;have its structure made out.

Plate 31, fig. 2, is an ideal vertical section, for the purpose of making more apparent what wasnbsp;the relative position of the parts when in situ.

Plate 32, is a diminished figure of a very fine specimen of a branch, showing that it was coverednbsp;^ith tubercles, having an irregularly spiral arrange-�^ont. The bodies that proceed from these tubercles are too much crushed, to enable us to judgenbsp;cf their form.

Plate 33, is another specimen of the same kind the last, with the tubercles more distinctlynbsp;shewn; the spiral arrangement is here very much

Plate 34, is a portion of the arm from which the processes that arise from the tubercles have beennbsp;Cast; the spiral arrangement is here more distinct.

Plate 35, is a section of an imbedded stem from the Mountain Limestone district ofWeardale, innbsp;the Sandstone of which formation it is abundant;nbsp;d also occurs in the Limestone of the same groupnbsp;rocks, near Wooler, in Northumberland, at

Birdy House, near Edinburgh, and in Fifeshire. The specimen shews that the axis was a woodynbsp;core, communicating by means of woody elongations with the tubercles on the outside; this corenbsp;has evidently contracted, since the plant was imbedded, and now lies almost loose in the cavity ofnbsp;the stem.

Plate 36, is a fragment of the stem in Ironstone, from Dysart in Scotland, from the Mountain Limestone formation; the specimen had been irregularly pressed and bruised before it hardened ; andnbsp;its core is seen to be very excentrical.

From all that has now been adduced, it would seem that the following inferences maybe drawn.

' the branches of which radiated regularly from a common centre, and, fi7ially, became forked. Whatnbsp;the nature of the centre itself was, it is difficultnbsp;now to conjecture; we only know, that it reallynbsp;belonged to the system of the stem, by the scarsnbsp;still remaining upon its surface. Perhaps, whatnbsp;seems in the fossil state to have been a continuousnbsp;homogeneous cup, or rather dome, may, in reality, be nothing more than the arms squeezednbsp;into a single mass where they came in contact,nbsp;their lines of separation being no longer traceable.nbsp;If a domed centre was the natural character ofnbsp;the genus, it was unlike any thing we now have ;nbsp;but is it not possible, that the domed appearancenbsp;may have arisen from the plant when imbeddednbsp;having been growing from the summit of a small

founded hillock ? Of its roots, nothing is known; but if small, and proceeding, as they no doubtnbsp;from the very centre of the dome, they would,nbsp;ffocessarily, be broken away with the mass ofnbsp;shale which separated from the plant, when itnbsp;left hanging in the roof of the coal mine.

2- That it was a succulent plant. Of this the oompression of the stems seems to offer a proof;nbsp;to which may be added, the frequent excentricitynbsp;its core, or woody axis, which may have beennbsp;owing to some inequality of the pressure to whichnbsp;Jt Was subjected. But if this evidence is thoughtnbsp;^fisufiicient, at least, the specimen, represented atnbsp;Tab. 35^ which is by no means an uncommonnbsp;state of the fossil, must be considered a strongnbsp;'Corroboration of the opinion. It is well known,nbsp;that if recent succulent plants, that are oldnbsp;^r^ough to have formed a woody axis, are placednbsp;situation in which decay takes place, thenbsp;parenchyma of the bark, and of the interstitial medullary rays of the wood deliquesces,nbsp;leaves the woody axis loose within the stillnbsp;^^decayed external portion of the bark. Wenbsp;Q bad occasion ourselves to notice this innbsp;tj^^*ctus Pereskia, and old stems of Opuntia. Ifnbsp;be examined, it will be found coverednbsp;nei ^��dy prolongations, which were the chan-'cf communication between the buds andnbsp;ofnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ structure more analogous to that

may be inferred from the existence of a central woody axis, from which the bark has separated.nbsp;If it were a Monocotyledonous plant, no suchnbsp;separation would have taken place, and no Cryp-togamic plant has a solid central axis, with a distinct cortical integument.

4. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;That the tubercles upon the stem are thenbsp;places from which leaves have fallen. This is provednbsp;by the great regularity with which they arenbsp;arranged upon the older stems. Roots nevernbsp;proceed from a stem with any kind of symmetry:nbsp;hence, Steinhauer�s conjecture, in this respect, isnbsp;inadmissible.

5. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;That the leaves were succulent and cylindrical.nbsp;There is, no direct evidence of this; but it seemsnbsp;probable that such was the case, from the crushednbsp;and shapeless state of the flat specimens, andnbsp;from Steinhauer�s observations on such as werenbsp;embedded without compression. Mr. Artis�snbsp;figure represents them as somewhat cylindrical;nbsp;but we have never been able to discover an instance of the forking that he speaks of, and figuresnbsp;in some specimens of leaves. With regard tonbsp;their length having been as much as twenty feet,nbsp;as Mr. Steinhauer states, we think there mustnbsp;have been some mistake in the observations uponnbsp;which that report was made.

What the analogy is, that this curious plant bore to species of the pre,sent day, it is, perhaps, impossible to demonstrate. That it did not belongnbsp;to Aroideae, as Brongniart once surmised, is ap-

parent. Was it a Lycopodiaceous plant, allied to Isoetes, as that ingenious author now conjectures?nbsp;think assuredly not. Indeed, we are so muchnbsp;a loss to discover in what the resemblance con-�ists, that we think that opinion must be aban-*ioned, especially as it can scarcely now benbsp;doubted, that Stigmaria was Dicotyledonous. Thenbsp;point of structure that seems to us to rendernbsp;probable that it was a Lycopodiaceous plant, isnbsp;*^he bifurcation of the branches, a character which,nbsp;Unless accompanied by other evidence, cannot benbsp;Considered of great importance.

We must look, then, among succulent Dicoty-oons for an analogy; and Euphorbiacese, Cacteas, ^od Asclepiadeas, at once suggest themselves. Innbsp;ot, if we compare the axis of Stigmaria withnbsp;that of Caetus Pereskia, the resemblance is mostnbsp;striking; but then it is probable that the axis ofnbsp;succulent Dicotyledonous plant would ex-d the same appearances, so that the loose axisnbsp;c Stigmaria would indicate a relation to Euphor-

The Stapelias of the Cape of Good Hope, or c Carallumas of India, have a trailing habit,nbsp;�gt;niilar to that of Stigmaria; but, it must benbsp;^nfessed, this is but a rude kind of analogy.

c should rather ineline to the belief, that it is ^ntween Euphorbiaceae, or Cactem, that the Bo-1st has to decide, if an existing analogy mustnbsp;^ found; and if we take the former in prefe-^'^ce, it is rather because their fructification

minute as to be easily lost or overlooked in a fossil, and that they have a greater tendency tonbsp;the development of leaves; while Cacteae, onnbsp;the other hand, have so highly developed a flower,nbsp;that it could not be overlooked, or lost; besides,nbsp;the fructification of Euphorbiaceas is deciduous,nbsp;that of Cactese persistent. We have left thenbsp;succulent families of Crassulaceas and Ficoideaenbsp;out of the question, because no existing generanbsp;of those orders approach Stigmaria in the smallestnbsp;degree.

We presume, that the specimens of Stigmaria, here represented, are all referable to one and thenbsp;same species, in different states ; at least, we cannbsp;discern no characters that we dare trust to distinguish them. Of Mr. Artis�s species, Ficoiditesnbsp;furcatus is from near the extremity of a branch,nbsp;with the leaves on ; F. verrucosus is a branchnbsp;that has lost its leaves ; and F. major seems to benbsp;the lower part of the same, where the tuberclesnbsp;are more deeply impressed.

With this beautiful species we commence our illustrations of Fossil Ferns, by far the most re-iuarkable of the tribes that formerly covered thenbsp;^��ust of Great Britain, and the most susceptible ofnbsp;positive determination. If the species that arenbsp;lound in a fossil state are not capable of beingnbsp;i'oduced to the genera of modern Botanists, this isnbsp;little importance, when we consider how arti-�oial those genera are, how bootless is the labournbsp;�Attempting to reduce the fossil species to thosenbsp;Ait the existing sera, and how probable it is thatnbsp;those principles of determining genera by thenbsp;Arrangement of the veins, and by the divisions ofnbsp;leaves, which Adolphe Brongniart has so judi-ciously pointed out with regard to fossil species,nbsp;^Ay be sooner or later adopted by Botanists in

The species now before us belongs to a genus lt;^Alled Pecopteris, which is characterized by the

leaves being once, twice, or thrice pinnate, and by the leaflets having a perfect midrib, from whichnbsp;forked veins proceed more or less at right anglesnbsp;with it.

With reference to modern ferns, it may be compared, as our valued friend Dr. Hooker reminds us, with Adiantum obtusum, from which its venationnbsp;distinguishes it, and also with certain Aspidia,nbsp;Polypodia, and Asplenia. Compared with fossilnbsp;species, it is so like Pecopteris oreopteridis, anbsp;plant found in the slaty clay of Manebach andnbsp;Radnitz, that we can find nothing, except its beingnbsp;twice the size of that species to distinguish it.

It appears to have been bipinnate, with its leaflets nearly of equal size, adherent to thenbsp;rachis by their base, of ten or eleven pair with annbsp;odd one, each being oblong and entire, with a verynbsp;rounded apex.

We are requested by Mr. Witham to say, that the Pinites Eggensis, figured at t. 30 of this work, was communicatednbsp;by Mr. Nicol, its original discoverer.

It was found in great abundance in one small ^strict of that seam, but has not been met withnbsp;where else.

I'lris species is so nearly the same as Pecopteris ^fuilina, figured by Schlotheim from the Coalnbsp;�^^asures of Manebach and Mandflech, that it maynbsp;^Irnost be considered the same. It appears, how-to differ essentially in the leaflets being nar-^ower, more tapering to the point, and muchnbsp;; and also, as far as we can judge from ournbsp;P^cimens, in that species having been of a more

compared with recent species, we would at sight pronounce it to be a Pteris, and even Pt.nbsp;^ plant that occupies at the present daynbsp;lin station in North America, that Pt. aqui-loss'l^^^^^ i�^ Europe; and upon comparing thenbsp;With the recent plant, this idea is so muchnbsp;�^gthened, that we cannot doubt that their

nature was the same. Nevertheless in this, as in all similar cases, close resemblance proves, uponnbsp;very accurate comparison, not to be the same asnbsp;identity; for in the fossil the lateral veins are allnbsp;simple, in the recent Pterides that resemble it thenbsp;veins are all dichotomous.

The fossil seems to have been a pinnate plant, with its lower pinnae deeply pinnatifid into linearnbsp;almost falcate segments, traversed by a singlenbsp;midrib, from which arise numerous simple veins ;nbsp;the upper pinnae entire, and nearly as long as thosenbsp;with the pinnatifid structure, from which theynbsp;abruptly change without any pinnatifid appearances upon themselves. Each pinnatifid pinna isnbsp;about 2^ to 2 inches long, and its segments aboutnbsp;one-sixth of that length; or if the pinnae arenbsp;longer, the leaflets are in the same proportion.

To this genus Sphenopteris are referred all ossil Ferns, with twice or thrice pinnated leaves,nbsp;ultimate leaflets of which do not adhere to thenbsp;rachis by their whole base, and are traversed bynbsp;r'Oe or two principal veins in each lobe.

The subject of this plate is closely allied to Phenopteris tridactylites, from which it differsnbsp;the lobes of its leaflets being shallower, andnbsp;toothed, or in any degree divided. S. hyine-^^Phylloides is another fossil species with thenbsp;^�Pect of this; but it has the partial rachis bor-^red with a membranous continuation of the basenbsp;� the leaflets, so as scarcely to come within thenbsp;racter of Sphenopteris, and is, moreover, an

ms has m some respects the aspect of modern �onias, but we know no species with which itnbsp;be strictly compared.

proportion ably thick, for the size of the leaflets, and of the partial rachis, which is in no way bordered with membrane, but distinctly rounded.nbsp;The leaflets were oblong, rather dilated at theirnbsp;base, and divided on each side into about six entire crenatures, which become gradually smallernbsp;towards the apex. To each leaflet there is onenbsp;principal midrib, from which one single veinnbsp;diverges into each crenature, losing itself before itnbsp;reaches the margin.

^dontopteris obtusa. Ad. Brongn. prodr. p. 60. Histoire des V�g�taux fossiles, p. 255. t. IQ.Jig. 3. 4.

^It is evidently the same as the plant found by ^ Brard in the Coal measures of Terrasson.

� specimens we have seen are, like those ex-^^ined by Adolphe Brongniart, mere fragments;

y nevertheless appear distinct from any of those ^^ith which we are acquainted in a more perfect

^hat is represented may have been the extre-either of a pinnatifid leaflet, or of a pin-^^sd leaf; there is nothing in the specimen to which. The lobes are oblong, rounded atnbsp;L 4

the end, nearly three times as long as broad, reckoning from the common midrib to their apex,nbsp;and gradually diminishing in size till they terminate in one broad blunt lobe, at least twice asnbsp;large as any other. The veins of each lobe arenbsp;once or twice dichotomous, but obscurely marked,nbsp;and all originate in an indistinct common midrib,nbsp;passing through the axis of the leaflet; there is nonbsp;midrib to the lobes. By this arrangement of thenbsp;veins, Odontopteris is characterized as a fossilnbsp;genus.

^europteris cordata. Ad. Brongn. Hist, des V�g�taux fossiles, p. 229. t. 64. �. 5.

^ike the last, from Leebotwood Coal Pit, and Communicated by Professor Buckland. It has alsonbsp;occurred in the mines of Alais and St. Etienne in

It appears to have been a fern of large size, judging from the unusual dimensions of the leaf-Jets, from a fragment of a rachis represented at �,nbsp;J^fom crushed remains of other portions of a stillnbsp;^gt;der rachis, and from a flattened cast, threenbsp;juches wide, of a fossil found in its vicinity, whichnbsp;Us been the stem of some arborescent fern. Thenbsp;ter is unfortunately in too imperfect a state tonbsp;c represented or even described.

'J�he leaflets have generally no attachment to the ^uchis, but are found lying loose in the shale;nbsp;*^^m which it may be inferred that they were notnbsp;suddenly buried in consequence of some convul-

sion, but were probably shed by the tree at the period when they naturally disarticulated. Theynbsp;are from 3 to 4^ inches long, of an oblong figure,nbsp;acute at the apex, cordate at the base, very blacknbsp;and shining, and with no other midrib than whatnbsp;is produced by the united bases of their veins,nbsp;which diverge from the axis of the leaflets, forming curved dichotomous lines that reach thenbsp;margin. The margin itself is perfectly entire.nbsp;At irregular intervals the veins are more than usually well marked; we know not whether this isnbsp;accidental, or characteristic of the species.

Among the large leaflets are found others of a nearly circular form, not more than half an inchnbsp;in diameter, and having veins radiating and dichotomizing with great regularity from their base,nbsp;which is cordate. These, with the existence ofnbsp;which, as well as of the evidence of the giganticnbsp;habit of our fern, Brongniart was unacquainted,nbsp;were doubtless the diminutive basal leaflets of onenbsp;of the pinnated divisions of the leaf, such as arenbsp;found upon the recent Pteris atropurpurea, andnbsp;upon the fossil Neuropteris heterophylla. Theynbsp;are represented at aaa in the plate.

The leaflets of this plant have very much the aspect of the wild Osmunda regalis, which has alsonbsp;a tendency to the production of small leaflets atnbsp;the base of the larger. But with this prima facienbsp;similarity, all comparison ceases, for the recentnbsp;plant would be a Pecopteris if found in a fossilnbsp;state.

permission of the Geological Society, we are ^^abled to publish the annexed representation ofnbsp;� only well defined specimen that has yet beennbsp;in the Coal measures, of what was certainlynbsp;stem of a tree fern. It was discovered in thenbsp;oal mines of Radstock, near Bath, and was ori-S^iially pointed out to us by Mr. Lonsdale.

it be compared with the recent stems of such ^ as Dicksonia arborea, or any of the Westnbsp;Cyatheas, in which the scars of the leavesnbsp;Very much elongated, it is impossible not tonbsp;Perceive their striking resemblance, particularlynbsp;quot;^i'on some of the fibrous matter that clothes thenbsp;�^^nt stems has rotted away.

specimen before us is a compressed frag-^ont, nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;sides nearly equally perfect,

surface is depressed into shallow sinuous fur-s, that form very elongated rhomboidal ridges^ Upper part of which is marked with a longnbsp;scar, very much broken at the edges, and on'nbsp;^ surface; these scars are from three to four

times as long as broad, and are disposed in a spiral manner, about four scars of each spire occupyingnbsp;one of the compressed sides of the fossil; so thatnbsp;it may be supposed that eight leaves went to thenbsp;making up of one complete turn of the spire whennbsp;the plant was growing. Over all the intervalsnbsp;between the spires, in patches of various sizes,nbsp;extends a sort of coaly covering, looking like a cortical integument, and having a great number ofnbsp;very minute transverse cracks. There is no tracenbsp;of any internal organization.

We have already, in the preface to this volume, pointed out the error of considering the fossilsnbsp;called Sigillarias, as the remains of Tree Fernnbsp;stems; the subject of this plate will make thisnbsp;sufficiently apparent, if compared with any of thenbsp;known species of Sigillaria. What the latter maynbsp;have been, it is, perhaps, impossible to determine;nbsp;we shall, however, in the next part of this work,nbsp;endeavour to show what their structure was, andnbsp;to point out such analogies as can be detected between them and recent plants.

.. j|’ ,, ,'■ :'^4-;4

P is a very remarkable circumstance that we ve no published evidence of the existence of Glu-l^^ceous Monocotyledons* in the Coal measures,nbsp;the fossils called Poacites appear to have beennbsp;^^rrow Monocotyledonous leaves, not belongingnbsp;the tribe of Glumacem.

In figuring this under the name of Cyperites, j ^ *^0 so rather from inability to match it with thenbsp;nves of any other family, than from any convic-that it really belongs to Cyperaceae.

In all Gramineae, Palms, or narrow-leaved Mo-|.^^'^Iyindons, that we have noticed, there is uni-a midrib, with which the other veins are or less parallel; and it is for the purpose ofnbsp;^^prehending all such fossil leaves that the genusnbsp;incites has been constructed. It is only in the

an excellent drawing and description of very remarkable plant, we are indebted tonbsp;*�� William Williamson, of Scarborough, for anbsp;j^^�ful account of its usual appearances to Mr.

and for the examination of a specimen to . �ean, of the same place. From these mate-vre are enabled to draw up the following

Account,

la,. 5 strata, he seems to consider it an uplifting of the �^tter.� ^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�

The plant appears to have grown to a considerable length ; Mr. Williamson�s drawing measures 18 inches ; it consisted of a flexuose axis, gradually tapering from the base to the apex, and having four or five longitudinal furrows distinctlynbsp;impressed upon its lower part. From this axis,nbsp;and almost at right angles with it, spring numerous imbricated leaflike bodies, each of which is ofnbsp;an oblong figure, broader on one side than thenbsp;other, decreasing from an inch and a quarter tonbsp;less than half an inch in length, perfectly entirenbsp;at the margin, and marked with five equal-sizednbsp;veins that radiate from the base to the circumference in a flabelliform manner, dichotomizing so asnbsp;to fill the margin as full of their ramifications as thenbsp;base. The dilatation of one side of these bodies,nbsp;which is the cause of their obliquity, is in allnbsp;cases towards the extremity. Their stalk is notnbsp;a mere lateral expansion of the border of the axis,nbsp;but originates from across the axis, as the leafletsnbsp;of Palms from their petiole.

Such being the structure of this plant, it becomes an enquiry of some difficulty to determine how to name the parts that have been described,nbsp;and thus to judge of the real nature of the fossil.nbsp;It looks at first sight like a pinnated leaf, of whichnbsp;the axis is the petiole, the lateral foliaceous bodies the leaflets. But we only know one tribe ofnbsp;plants in which the leaflets are set on across the

petiole, and that is the Palm tribe; and we have modern instance of a flexuose petiole in Palms,nbsp;of a form of leaf like this decreasing gradu-from the base to the apex. Is it the pinnatednbsp;of a Cycadeoidea? among the remains ofnbsp;�^ber species of which it was found; certainly not:

the setting on of the leafy parts is at variance ^ith that of Cycadese, and the veins are dichoto-^'tous. Is it a pinnated Fern? Its veins agree,nbsp;^'it the setting on of the leafy bodies again rendersnbsp;this improbable.

^e believe it to be not a pinnated, but a creep-Fern, such as many Hymenophylla and Poly-Podiums found in tropical countries at this day. flexuose axis appears to have been a creepingnbsp;or rhizoma, and the foliaceous bodies to havenbsp;leaves growing from that creeping stem,nbsp;^�^all, when young, at the upper end, and fullnbsp;b^own only towards the base of the specimen. Ifnbsp;is view of the subject is correct, then this willnbsp;been a Cyclopteris, of which one other sup-Piised species, the curious C. digitata, has alreadynbsp;found in the Oolite.

SPHENOPTERIS AFFINIS.

Communicated by Mr. Witham. It occurs in fine hard blue mountain limestone in the greatnbsp;Lime quarries near Gilmerton, a little south ofnbsp;Edinburgh, where it is associated with finely preserved remains of other ferns, Lepidodendra, Le-pidostrobi, Stigmarim, See.

This beautiful species is nearly related to the subject of the next plate, from which it differsnbsp;principally in being smaller in all its parts, withnbsp;shorter lobes to its leaflets, and a larger number ofnbsp;divisions. It may be a mere variety of it; but ifnbsp;it is too well marked to be omitted.

The leaf was bipinnate, the leaflets being deeply pinnatifid into five segments, each of which isnbsp;divided into from three to five linear obtuse segments, which are broadest at the upper end, andnbsp;marked with from one to three parallel veins.

scribed and figured by Count Sternberg, and by , � ^fongniart from the Newcastle Coal field,nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;were at one time disposed to believe them

atical. But, upon comparing this with the Magnified representations of the latter Botanist,nbsp;have come to a different conclusion.

Was a bipinnate fern, with pinnatifid seg-^^Qts, the four or five divisions of which are split *^^0 about three long linear obtuse lobes, each ofnbsp;, ^^h has from one to three veins. In Sp. Arte-^isiaefoiia are the contrary; the segments havenbsp;five to nine divisions, the lobes of which arenbsp;'^ader, far less deeply split, and marked withnbsp;five to seven veins. In this they agree, thatnbsp;*tiain petiole is forked near its middle.

At first sight, we took this for the Sphenopteris usiJoba, of Brongniart; but an attentive examination of its veins shews that it is not onlynbsp;that species, but that it would belong tonbsp;^ genus Odontopteris, to a species of which,nbsp;� Schlotheimii, it nearly approaches, if its leaflets

^t is distinguished by the final divisions of the ^�gments of the leaves, or the leaflets, being eithernbsp;�mire, or two-lobed, or even three-lobed; thenbsp;6s being, in all cases, sensibly dilated at thenbsp;and the divisions themselves placed widelynbsp;and contracted into a sort of petiole at their

base.

,;%

quot;^Pparently this is very nearly the same as � Virletii, than which it is far smaller. Itnbsp;jnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;fragments so much broken that it is

div'to say what has been the degree of �f the perfect leaves. All that we havenbsp;are pinnated portions, with long, narrow,nbsp;(,j,P^r'Pointed leaflets, pinnatifid at the base,nbsp;ted at the apex, both segments and crena-^ being rounded and one-veined.

^ should conjecture, from their general ap-ance, that these were fragments of some very oompQynd leaf, of which they are merely thenbsp;^quot;quot;'al portions.

49 neuropteris loshii.

��opteris Loshii. A. Brongn. prodr. p. 53. Hist, des veg. foss, p. 242. t. 72, 1, and 73.

^he b extremity of a bipinnate leaf. Towards ^*16 leaflets of the pinnae are all nearlynbsp;^gt;1 size, of an oblong or ovate figure, dimi-

nishing to the apex ; but, towards the upper extremity, the terminal leaflet is much larger than the rest, and of a more elongated figure. Thenbsp;difference in form between the lower and terminalnbsp;leaflets of this species, will give an idea of thenbsp;relation that the two forms of leaflets in N. cordi-folia bear to each other.

nis very distinct Neuropteris, from Felling does not appear distinguishable from anbsp;^ *^ins found in the Anthraeite of Savoy^ bynbsp;j^oret, after whom it has been named.

oceurs in broken fragments, appearing to belonged to a bipinnate leaf, of which somenbsp;pinnules bear as many as thirteen pairs of

preserved, as it is to indicate a specific difference. The lateral leaflets are very exactly oblong, obtusenbsp;at each end, and do not overlap each other, except towards the extremities of the pinnules.

51 neuropteris acuminata.

^^opteris acuminata. Ad. Brongti. prodr. p. 53. Hist, des ^9*^iO'V,xfoss. 1.229. t. 63. �. 4, copied from Schlotkeim.

Except in its leaflets being less cordate, we o flistinguish this from the very rare fossils foundnbsp;^ the Coal measures of TCleinschmalkalden, andnbsp;�g�red by Baron von Schlotheira. Those speci-and ours are both in nearly the same state,nbsp;that it is impossible to say to what kind of stemnbsp;rachis they belonged.

Brongniart points out their general resem-^^�nce to some species of Lygodium. If they

really belonged to such plants, and the very remarkable similarity between them and the barren leaflets of L. microphyllum makes such a conjecture not improbable, the species must have been anbsp;climber, and the part now represented a lateralnbsp;pinnule of a much branched axis. In recent Ly-godia the base of the leaflets, when cordate, variesnbsp;so much from that to a merely ovate form, especially in L. microphyllum, pubescens, and thenbsp;like, that we do not doubt that circumstance tonbsp;be unimportant as a specific distinction.

The principal objection to this having been n Lygodium, appears to us to consist in the greatnbsp;breadth of the petiole of the Fossil, and itsnbsp;slender character in the recent species. In thenbsp;specimen now before us, (the only one that hasnbsp;been discovered,) the petiole is, at its widest parfinbsp;about two lines broad, and looks as if it had beennbsp;flat. But the venation of the leaflets, wide neatnbsp;the middle, and gradually becoming more andnbsp;more dense towards the margin, in consequencenbsp;of the dichotomizing of the veins, is altogethernbsp;that of Lygodia.

��om the Coal measures of Saarbruck^ Eschwei-^ettin, and Kleinschmalkalden, according to ^ otheim, and of Schatzlar, according to Stern-^ and also of Newcastle, our specimen havingnbsp;^ procured from Jarrow Colliery.

dh the modern genus Osmunda, to which it ^^en referred, it does not appear to have anynbsp;in common except the form of its leaflets,nbsp;stature was probably considerable, the frag-figured by Sternberg having a rachis sonbsp;N 3

stout, that it could scarcely have belonged to a leaf less than several feet long. What is shownnbsp;upon the accompanying plate is a pinna only, of anbsp;bipinnate leaf.

.� ^

'Wp-

SPHENOPTERIS? BIFIDA.

Conitnumcated by Mr. Witham, from the moun-lime-stone of the lime quarries of Birdy Souse, near Edinburgh.

So little has this the appearance of a Fern, that Would say it had surely been a root of somenbsp;^^uatic plant, or at least its submersed stem, withnbsp;dissected leaves, as we now find floating innbsp;Pitches, or pools, and belonging to Myriophyl-^um, Utricularia, Ranunculus, and the like,nbsp;lu fact, if we compare it with Utricularia mi-we shall see that in both plants the leavesnbsp;Itave the same dichotomous divisions, terminatingnbsp;Equally in fine subulate points; nor do we knownbsp;how fragments of such Utricularias as U. minor,nbsp;intermedia, and many others, are with any cer-tuinty to be distinguished from many species ofnbsp;'^^ichomanes and Hymenophyllum. Compare,nbsp;instance, U. intermedia with Brongniart s figuresnbsp;several species of Sphenopteris, {Hist, des veg.

division, and venation. Nevertheless, as this is a bipinnated plant, it probably was not an Utricu-laria, all the known species of which are simple;nbsp;and it is also not likely to have been a part ofnbsp;any species of the other genera above alluded to.nbsp;On the contrary, it must, with the imperfect knowledge we possess about it, be arranged in the genusnbsp;Sphenopteris, in the vicinity of S. myriophylla,nbsp;from which it is known by its leaves not havingnbsp;more than three or four primary divisions, andnbsp;these not radiating from a common centre, and repeatedly dichotomous, but arising from a flexuosenbsp;axis, and simply bifid.

class of Fossils, the larger sterns of which ^cciir in great abundance, not only in the variousnbsp;�^^nahers of the Coal formation proper, but also innbsp;l^any of the beds of the subjacent mountainnbsp;�*^cstone series.

quot;These stems have often escaped compression, stand perpendicularly across the strata, some-hiiies having roots proceeding from them on allnbsp;; they are generally, if not always, sur-^nbsp;*^�8nded by an envelope of fine crystalline bitumi-j^^8s Coal, as much as an inch in thickness. Thenbsp;'^�^gitudinal flutings which are the characteristicnbsp;^^�rks of this Fossil, generally are indistinct on

That these plants have been hollow, and of little substance, is proved by their extreme thinnessnbsp;when horizontal, and by their being frequentlynbsp;composed, when upright, entirely of sand-stone,nbsp;within the outer eoating of Coal. This is often ofnbsp;a nature different from the rock in which theynbsp;are embedded, and also frequently contains impressions of Ferns or other plants; and the internalnbsp;layers of sand-stone when separated, instead ofnbsp;being horizontal, present a dished appearance.

Plate 54, represents one of these Fossils found immediately above the Coal in Killingworth Colliery, near Newcastle. It is figured and described in the Transactions of the Natural Historynbsp;Society of Newcastle, vol. 1, page 206, by Mr.nbsp;Nicholas Wood, who also presented the specimennbsp;to the Museum of that Society. The lower partnbsp;was 2 feet in diameter, coated with coal, and indistinctly fluted; the roots were embedded innbsp;shale, and could be traced 4 feet or more from thenbsp;stem, branching and gradually growing less (onenbsp;of the larger of these is shewn at fig. 2); thesenbsp;roots, as well as the whole of the stem, were composed of fine grained white sand-stone, totally different from the rock in which the lower portion ofnbsp;the Fossil was enveloped, but agreeing perfectlynbsp;with a bed surrounding the higher part.

For the purpose of examining this Fossil, Mr. Wood had the stone surrounding it removed,

during which operation we had an opportunity of '^isiting it twice in the mine, and of taking drawingsnbsp;^�d measurements. At the height of about 10 feetnbsp;stem was partially broken and bent over, so asnbsp;to become horizontal; and here it was considerably distended laterally, and not more than an inchnbsp;thick, having the flutings comparatively distinct.

This stem formed one of a considerable group, less than 30 being visible within an areanbsp;of 50 yards square, some of them larger thannbsp;this individual, all presenting the same generalnbsp;characters, and appearing to have grown wherenbsp;they now stand. The specimen under review,nbsp;Conveyed the idea of having been able, by thenbsp;of its strong spreading roots, to withstandnbsp;the force of the current which had prostrated andnbsp;Scattered its weaker congeners. Above the heightnbsp;cf lO feet, however, it had been partially broken,nbsp;^nd overthrown, the stem having a south west

The perpendicular trunks of this Fossil are often the cause of serious accidents to the colliers,nbsp;the coaly envelope, weakening the cohesion ofnbsp;the strata, causes them to detach themselves, andnbsp;^oddenly slip out of the roof, after the seam ofnbsp;Coal has been removed from below, when theynbsp;leave circular holes, 1 to 3 feet in height, sometimes 4, or even 5 feet in diameter.

Such are the Geological facts connected with ^igillariffi. The next question is, what analogynbsp;'lid they bear to existing plants? According to

Mr. Artis, they were related to Euphorbiaceae ; in the opinion of Schlotheim, Palms are their kindred.nbsp;Von Martins refers them to Cacteae; Brongniartnbsp;formerly considered them completely differentnbsp;from any thing at present known; but now, withnbsp;Count Sternberg, places thepi among Filices.

Of these opinions, the only ones that require examination are those of Artis, Von Martins,nbsp;Von Sternberg, and Brongniart.

The arguments that have been adduced in support of the analogy of Sigillaria with the trunks of Tree Ferns, are not very clear ; they seem to depend more upon a supposed resemblance betweennbsp;the scars left upon the surface of Sigillarise, andnbsp;the thick cortical integument that enveloped theirnbsp;trunks, than upon any thing else. The resemblancenbsp;between the scars of Tree Fern stems and thosenbsp;of Sigillaria, appears to us to be altogether imaginary, for in all the stems of modern Tree Fernsnbsp;there is uniformly a ragged margin, a spiralnbsp;arrangement, a denseness of situation, and a sizenbsp;which are wholly at variance with what occursnbsp;in Sigillaria ; and as to the presence of a distinctnbsp;cortical integument, there are two difficulties innbsp;the way of admitting that as proof of an analogynbsp;between Tree Ferns and Sigillaria, either of whichnbsp;seems to us to be fatal.

Firstly, In Sigillaria this cortical integument overlaid the whole surface of the stem, and thenbsp;leaves were evidently articulated upon it (as ap'nbsp;pears by the cleanness of the scars they have left

153

^^hind), being connected with the woody, or, at ^^^st, central axis, by one or two bundles of ves-^els that passed through a thick cortical mass.nbsp;Now, in Tree Ferns, the leaves are not articulatednbsp;^�Ih the stem, leave no clean scar behind whennbsp;fall

away, and have, for the most part, no '''oody axis, with which they may be connectednbsp;bundles of vessels; but, on the contrary, arenbsp;*�iere prolongations of certain sinuous woodynbsp;plates, which form the hollow cylindrical stem.nbsp;Secondly, it is plain that the cortical integumentnbsp;of Sigillaria was of the nature of true bark, that is,nbsp;separable freely, without tearing, from the woodynbsp;as is evinced by the remains of the decor-bcated specimens that are so common; while, innbsp;quot;^fee Fern sterns, the cortical integument is of thenbsp;nature of that spurious bark in Palms, and othernbsp;l^onocotyledonous trees, which is not more sepa-J'ablefrom the axis than strips of the wood itself.

Another argument against the identity of Sigil-Inriae and Tree Fern stems, is furnished by M. I^rongniart himself, although he does not admitnbsp;'Is value. That excellent observer remarked innbsp;Coal mines of Kunzwerk, near Essen, a stemnbsp;nf Sigillaria, the position of which enabled himnbsp;l-n follow it nearly its whole extent. The stemnbsp;''^ns laid parallel to the floor of the gallery, atnbsp;nbout the height of the eye of the observer ; nearnbsp;'�be base it was about a foot in diameter, and appeared broken, not terminated naturally. It was,nbsp;bke all stems deposited in the direction of strata.

compressed so as to be almost flat. Following this stem in the gallery, he was astonished to findnbsp;that it extended uninterruptedly to more thannbsp;40 feet, its diameter gradually diminishing, so thatnbsp;it was not more than 6 inches across at its uppernbsp;end. That end, instead of terminating suddenly,nbsp;was divided into two branches, each about 4 inchesnbsp;in diameter, which diverged for a few inches, andnbsp;was then interrupted by a partition in the rock.nbsp;Now this bifurcation, which M. Brongniart considers strongly corroborative of the affinity of Sigil-laria and Ferns, is of no value whatever, as annbsp;evidence of dichotomous ramification ; because innbsp;all cases when a lateral bud developes from a preexisting axis, or when two terminal buds deve-lope together, bifurcation must obviously be thenbsp;consequence; but it will not be dichotomy, unlessnbsp;the developement of terminal buds repeatedlynbsp;takes place, to the exclusion of all other buds�nbsp;which was not observed. Besides, we do notnbsp;know that Tree Ferns would grow in a dichotomous manner, if they were to branch. On thenbsp;contrary, we know that when they have been seennbsp;accidentally to branch, they are not dichotomous, asnbsp;is proved by a plant of Dicksoniaarborea now growing in the Garden of the Horticultural Society.

Had the hypothesis just objected to been supported by a Botanist of less knowledge than M. Brongniart, we should have been satisfied tonbsp;refute it by referringto thefigureof atrueTree Fern,nbsp;Caulopteris primaeva, at t. 42 of this work, and

I� those of Sigillaria, which immediately fol-^ this article ; but we have thought it due to , � I^rongniart�s high reputation to go at lengthnbsp;^�^to the question.

^ith regard to the opinion of Mr. Artis, that ^igdlaria was related to succulent EuphorbisB, andnbsp;the learned von Martins, that they may be compared to Cactese, there can be no doubt, that, asnbsp;^ar as external characters go, it approached thesenbsp;plants more nearly than any others now known,nbsp;particularly in its soft texture, in its deeply chan-aalled stems, and, what is of more consequence.nbsp;Its scars, placed in perpendicular rows betweennbsp;the furrows. It is also well known that both thesenbsp;Modern tribes, particularly the latter, arrive evennbsp;at a great stature; further, it is extremelynbsp;probable, indeed almost certain, that Sigillaria wasnbsp;a Dicotyledonous plant, for no others at the pre-��t day have a true separable bark. Nevertheless,nbsp;the total absence of all knowledge of the leavesnbsp;aad flowers of these ancient trees, we think it bet-I'^r to place the genus among other species, thenbsp;affinity of which is at present altogether doubtful.

SIGILLAR�A pachyderma.

(decorticated); in these the scars are narro''^^ small, sometimes indistinct, and often double,nbsp;reniform.

According to Mr. Artis, a further difference J*� character is to be expected in the same speci�^'nbsp;He states, that in Euphorbites vulgaris, whi�^nbsp;seems to be a very perfect state of this Sigill�'^*^nbsp;pachyderma, the surface of the younger partnbsp;the scars in single rows, rhomboidal with a re^inbsp;form impression near the upper end, with a decCnbsp;rent line on either side; but that in thenbsp;stem when old, every other furrow widens,nbsp;becomes concave, while the alternate ones coPnbsp;tract, so that between each fluting there isnbsp;rows of scars instead of one. As we have not vet*nbsp;fied this observation, we think it better fornbsp;present to consider the double and single ro'V�nbsp;specimens as belonging to different species.

^'^^tnlingtonColliery,in Northumberland. �P6cimen consisted of the coal itself,nbsp;^hen sliced and examined microscopically,nbsp;, ^ed traces of tissue, the nature of which wenbsp;Pla' �nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1-� h^ve an opportunity of ex-

(Decorticated.)

�^almacites sulcatus. Schloth. Petrefaktenkunde. p. 396, 1.16. ��!. (decorticated.)

�'alniacites canaliculatus. Jb. t. 16. f. 2. (decorticated.) ^igillaria reniformis. Ad. Brong. in Ann. des Sc. 4. p. 32. t. 2.

^ Syringodendron pulchellum. Sternb. Fl. der vorw.fasc. 4. 48. t. 62. f. 2. (decorticated.)

The Goal mines of Eschweiler, Essen, and ^aldenburg, in Germany, and of Newcastle,nbsp;^ave all produced this Fossil, which also appearsnbsp;from Von Schlotheim to occur in the Greywack�nbsp;the Harz, and in the Quadersandstein, nearnbsp;^otha.

In its corticated state it presents impressions of ^'oundish kidney shaped scars, in the centre of

which is a point, and at a little distance on each side a curved mark : when stripped of its bark, asnbsp;in the accompanying specimen, it has oval contiguous scars, arranged in pairs.

Sternberg�s Syringodendron pulchellum, from the Argillaceous Schist of Waldenburg, with thenbsp;scars of the decorticated specimen a short distancenbsp;apart, is apparently this same species at a morenbsp;advanced age.

SIGILLARIA CATENULATA. (Corticated.)

� Lepidolepis syringioides. Stemb.ftor. der vorw.fasc. 3. p. 40. t. 31. �. 2. (corticated.)

Unless this is the Lepidolepis syringioides received by Count Sternberg from the mines of St. Ingbert, it is an undescribed species, remarkablenbsp;for the appearance of its oval scars, which, touching one another at the ends, form a kind ofnbsp;chain; the spaces between the furrows are aboutnbsp;*^wo inches across.

^�i�iarkable species is readily known by its 'which are almost as broad as the spacesnbsp;degnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;furrows, and which, having a well

fajjjt^^ ^'^^�iler scar in their midrib, have some ^hcenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;to an eye, or to that appear-

naturalists call ocellated; it is very chigg^ same as Sigillaria notata, which isnbsp;Th^ ^^�*'*�^8'^ished by the form of its scars.

:'v:^-feamp; ■ r''■^■:^'''

^ %i^VfW^.'' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.%nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■'^'- . 'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;%“’■ quot;■ T --. „^''i'-V'; quot;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'»■* ,.,quot;■'1

cWi^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■v-'^;jgsr - y ^

Vf • *• . nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'■' -.:nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^-r-„ .'-

'.-Js^rv'-'-■;'^.. ,. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;''nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;''nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. .V

■ IS

..... . nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■’■ ■'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;” Ïquot;*-•*■-;-'■quot;■ ''• ' ■nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;, er-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;j, , -nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;j

■-r-i'' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;• 7' ' 7_. -- ■■■ ‘',.'J~

fe. Hf' ï 1 i’ :-'^ir‘i-'‘ ■ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'- ■ '‘’-'r'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;c .J.’.'if' •.-Vr; '-

05S^''» r ^ ~ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;• •^. V -lt;n*' -I-. »—• ' gt;.'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;' '-lt;•«-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^-gt;. »«% *“ •• v»^-* *r^'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'VV . „ 5

VMV^ «ktU'ih^S nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;hMnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,gt;f ^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;*«:!

\iS-'quot;®ife \ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■fquot;'* ~nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.T-^ .'l-ji-J-’ ''“« 7.^-'’nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ V--'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;‘ r ‘ s

•pv.-'c- nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;::;:• •’f'?'quot;- ' ■’ '•

:|Sr?’^'' -JC'*' 7'. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;•' ‘’S'fv ■'^'’-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;-V-V; '• *' '-'^ .'7^

* nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■* n.'‘•’nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;‘nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,ernbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;*■-'■nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;•-*-^**nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;“*■'*'VNésafe

k- nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;;v% ‘ '.v'quot;'.-n'‘—•'•nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. '^ quot;

' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,--•-i. ,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;t: .nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,n'vr ;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;«%

i' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■ i'. - ; ■i-'i ,-• 'i ..nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;»nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'■nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. -.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;T ^

■■»'v-. ii?” ' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■-■ ‘V- •-• ■ ■ ■-•':■•' *■-■'■;

Mrwuifird.

^ are indebted to Mr. Bean, of Scarborough, fine specimens of several very interesting fossilnbsp;P 3nts from the Yorkshire Coast. They all belongnbsp;^ the Oolitic series, and will be gradually figurednbsp;y in this work.

. quot;^fiat which is the subject of the present plate ^niong the most remarkable. In the first place,nbsp;is a Fern in which traces of the fructificationnbsp;^ extremely well preserved : a case so rare, thatnbsp;. iilphe Brongniart was only acquainted withnbsp;instances when he wrote his Prodromus in

1828 ; and, secondly, it has a very striking resemblance to one of the commonest of the recent Ferns found in this island.

It occurs very rarely in the shale of a rich bed of fossil plants at Gristhorpe, near Scarborough�nbsp;first discovered by Mr. Bean ; our specimen liesnbsp;among fragments of a very narrow Poacites,nbsp;and of a Pterophyllum. The whole leaf, or frond,nbsp;.seems to have had an oblong outline, and to havenbsp;been perhaps seven or eight inches in length�nbsp;of which rather more than three inches now remain. Its rachis is so much destroyed, thatnbsp;nothing can be determined as to its originalnbsp;surface. The leaf was pinnatifid nearly downnbsp;to the midrib; the segments were nearly linear�nbsp;about an inch long, with an obtuse termination ; each segment is traversed by a strongnbsp;middle rib, upon which, nearly perpendicularly^nbsp;are implanted veins, which bifurcate a little b^'nbsp;yond the midrib; of this bifurcation one armnbsp;directed obliquely towards the apex of the seg'nbsp;ment, and is stopped about half way between th^nbsp;midrib and the margin, by a round spot, whid�^nbsp;indicates the presence of a sorus, or mass of fraC'nbsp;tification; the other arm again bifurcates, a^dnbsp;apparently reaches the margin ; at least we though^nbsp;we distinctly made this out, by holding the sp�'nbsp;cimen in a particular light; we are, however,nbsp;no means sure, that its divisions do not stop sbot*^

the margin; the fact is, that the veins are so indistinct, that we have found much difficultynbsp;detecting them at all. The margin of thenbsp;^^gnients looks, in some places, as if it had beennbsp;^vided into little teeth; but, in others, it is evi-^tly quite entire; and we have no doubt, thatnbsp;former appearance is only caused by thenbsp;^^aking up of the black carbonaceous matternbsp;has given the impression,nbsp;is evident that our Fossil is referable tonbsp;�Adolphe Brongniart�s genus Pecopteris; but asnbsp;figures, illustrative of that genus, are notnbsp;published, we have no means of knowing tonbsp;species; we conjecture only, that it mustnbsp;� his P. polypodioides, from the aptness of thenbsp;and from its having been procured by himnbsp;�quot;om the lower Oolite.

We compare it with recent Ferns, we can-fail to be struck with its great resemblance the very common Polypodium vulgare ; a plantnbsp;^^tremely variable in size, and in the outline ofnbsp;ds segments, but in many states scarcely distinguishable from the fossil. In both, the outlinenbsp;the leaf and of the segments, the arrangenbsp;dient of the veins, and the situation of the sori,nbsp;the same ; but in the Fossil the margin ofnbsp;'^he segments appears to have been entire;nbsp;quot;^hile, in the recent species, it is, we believe,nbsp;dWays serrated. Beyond this, we really find

so little of moment, that we doubts whether, if a recent Fern were discovered, with so much similarity, and so little discrepancy, it would benbsp;considered more than a variety of Polypodiuronbsp;vulgare.

^ike the last, this is again an instance of re-^^�kable resemblance between the plants of the ofitic series, and those of the present day. With-taking any particular species, for that wouldnbsp;V 3

be difficult, where comparison has to be established between so imperfect a relic as this, and speciesnbsp;that, throughout a whole group, are exceedinglynbsp;similar to each other,�we should say, compare thisnbsp;with such plants as Lycopodium complanatum, ornbsp;any of the same section, and the likeness willnbsp;be found so extremely strong, as to leave no doubtnbsp;of their complete analogy.

Such recent plants are, on the one hand, allied to Ferns, with which they agree in the presencenbsp;of vascular tissue, more or less perfect in theirnbsp;axis, and in their mode of curling up in thenbsp;nascent state; on the other hand, they resemblenbsp;mosses, from which they are known by their ramifications, and very different organs of reproduction. Their stems divide by forking repeatedly ; and are covered closely with leaves, whichnbsp;are arranged in two rows, having their edgesnbsp;vertical with respect to the axis of growth, notnbsp;horizontal. These leaves are placed alternately�nbsp;and are furnished with lateral smaller leaflets, ofnbsp;the nature of stipulm.

In the Fossil, the figure of the larger leaves is distinctly and strongly falcate, with an obtusenbsp;extremity, and with a perfectly entire margin-Of the smaller leaflets but very imperfect tracesnbsp;are to be discovered; they, however, certainlynbsp;exist, although they are not shewn in the magnified drawing at fig. 2.

Adolphe Brongniart, from the lower Oolite, a Species of which neither figure nor descriptionnbsp;^ave yet been published, it must be altogethernbsp;aew; for we can meet with no trace of it in anynbsp;other work than that above referred to. It is onenbsp;of the prettiest species that have yet been obtainednbsp;the rich beds of fossil plants at Scarborough.

�2.

Scolopendrium. Young and Bird, Geol. Sun. Yorks.t.2, f.i). TEeniopteris vittata. Ad. Brongn. Prodr. p.Q'2. Hist.des V�g�t.

From the shale of the Gristhorpe bed, near Scarborough ; communicated by Mr. Bean. It has also been detected at Hoer, in Scania, and atnbsp;Neuewelt, near Bale; it is regarded by Ad.nbsp;Brongniart as one of the most common in thenbsp;Jurassic formations, and as a species characteristic of his third period of vegetation.

Our figure represents a cast of the upper surface of a leaf, of which the extremity has been destroyed. It was rather more than five inchesnbsp;long, of a narrow lanceolate form, terminatingnbsp;rather abruptly, and unequally at the base. Itsnbsp;veins are close together, quite perpendicular tonbsp;the midrib, and either very simple, or oncenbsp;forked; its stalk is continuous with the midrib,nbsp;and seems to have been smooth.

Any one would naturally be led to consider this very analogous to the recent Scolopendriuninbsp;officinale, for its general aspect and mode ofnbsp;venation are strikingly similar; but Brongniartnbsp;has met with a specimen which has traces ofnbsp;round impressions upon it, which may havenbsp;been sori; and, if so, this could have been nonbsp;Scolopendriuni, but must have been more likenbsp;some simple-leaved Aspidium or Polypodium, tonbsp;which Brongniart compares it rather than tonbsp;Scolopendrium.

GLOSSOPTERIS PHILLIPS II.

Pecopteris longifolia. Phillips� Geol. Yoi'ks. p. 189. t. 8. �. 8. P. paucifolia. ld. p. 148.

Communicated by Mr. Bean, from the shale of the Gristhorpe bed, near Scarborough. Wenbsp;^re also indebted to Mr. Dunn, the Vice-Presidentnbsp;of the Scarborough Philosophical Society, for thenbsp;Accompanying drawings from the pencil of Missnbsp;Helen Thornhill.

Neither Brongniart, nor Phillips, appear to have known the real structure of this species,nbsp;both these accurate observers having seen onlynbsp;leaflets separated from their stalk; they, there-

fore, took it for a simple leaved Fern and the former compares it with certain species of Gi'cim-mitis and Acrostichurn.

It was, however, as will now be seen, a plant with four-parted leaves, the stalk of which wasnbsp;continuous with the leaflets; the latter were of anbsp;figure, varying in form from linear-lanceolatenbsp;(fig. 2.) to oval, (fig, 1.), and in length from annbsp;inch and a half to four inches. The veins arenbsp;many times dichotomous, anastomozing into anbsp;sort of net-work next the midrib.

What we find very singular in this Fossil is, that the leaflets are four, not five, in number, asnbsp;is the case with modern Ferns of a similar habit;nbsp;on this account we are unable to compare it withnbsp;any recent species. Adolphe Brongniart, indeed,nbsp;points out simple leaved Aspidia as analogous;nbsp;but, as we have just said, he was unacquaintednbsp;with the true structure of the plant.

We cannot doubt, that figures 1 and 2, are varieties of the same species; their differences innbsp;form are only such as we find in different individuals of the same modern species; and it is notnbsp;improbable, that the broad leaved form (fig. 1.)nbsp;may be the barren leaf, while fig. 2 is the fertilenbsp;leaf.

We confess we have some doubt of this having been a Fern; its texture, and general appearance, together with its irregular lobing, being verynbsp;much at variance with any modern Ferns that wenbsp;are acquainted with. It, however, answers wellnbsp;enough to the artificial character of the genus;nbsp;and it is not worth disturbing its name, unlessnbsp;some better evidence of its nature than we atnbsp;present possess shall be discovered.

A single specimen of this very remarkable Fossil was discovered by J. E. Bowman, Esq.nbsp;of the Court, near Wrexham, among the ejectednbsp;�hale of a Coal-pit, near the entrance of the Valenbsp;^f Llangollen, in the county of Denbigh.

It was about an inch in diameter, of a deep Igt;lue-black colour, with a blue lustre here andnbsp;there, probably caused by the alumine of thenbsp;shale having been brought out by exposure tonbsp;*�ain. Along with the specimen, we received fromnbsp;^ts discoverer some extremely useful Notes, ofnbsp;^hich we have availed ourselves in the followingnbsp;Account.

Fig. B. 1, in the annexed plate, represents the Fossil of its natural size, and as it appears to thenbsp;�^aked eye, with the exception of its being shownnbsp;^uch paler than the original, for the sake of dis-bnctness. Fig. B. 2. is the same, much mag-ihfied.

It appears to have been a roundish oval body, flat, and marked externally, near the margin, Avithnbsp;numerous zones, which follow the border withnbsp;tolerable regularity; across these zones run rathernbsp;close lines, converging towards some commonnbsp;centre. The whole of the middle part is even,nbsp;and unmarked by lines, except in a few patches,nbsp;as at b. c., where the cuticle seems to have beennbsp;removed; in these patches the lines are muchnbsp;more close than those at the margins, and do notnbsp;converge towards a centre, but have directionsnbsp;that are not in accordance in the different patches,nbsp;neither do they correspond with the convergingnbsp;lines near the margin. In one or two places, asnbsp;at a, dots, arranged with great regularity, arenbsp;more or less distinctly indicated. The apparentnbsp;centre of the specimen, which is a good deal injured, seems, by the direction of the lines, to havenbsp;scarcely been the organic centre. A portion onlynbsp;of the margin was preserved, and the specimennbsp;had no sensible thickness.

In a second specimen, subsequently found by Mr. Bowman, and the only other that has occurred, the principal part of the characters noWnbsp;described were equally found, with the addition,nbsp;that the margin seemed nearly complete; fromnbsp;which it seems, that the figure of the Fossil mustnbsp;have been what Botanists call roundish-ovate, thenbsp;base of such a figure being the border where thenbsp;concentric zones and cross converging lines are

situated ; the apex, wanting both these, being smoother, more polished, and irregularly indentednbsp;''^'^ith minute depressed dots.

It is a matter of great doubt, whether this *'eally belongs to the vegetable kingdom ; Mr.nbsp;Bowman remarks, that his second specimennbsp;�^ight be taken for the scale of a fish, or of somenbsp;great Saurian Reptile; and we admit it now,nbsp;''without daring to offer any decided opinion aboutnbsp;it, chiefly on account of its resemblance, in somenbsp;points, to some Cellular* plants of the presentnbsp;�ra.

There are certain Fungi belonging to the genera boletus, Polypoj'us, Thelephora, Dcedalea, amp;c., whichnbsp;attach themselves to their support by one side,nbsp;projecting forward from it, and increasing bynbsp;periodical additions to their margin, in consequence of which that part assumes a zoned appearance ; when these shrivel, they contract intonbsp;iines or wrinkles, that form radii, lying acrossnbsp;I^e zones. On their upper surface these Funginbsp;^^e smooth, or more or less velvety or hairy ; onnbsp;their under side they are perforated with holesnbsp;Perpendicular to the surface, forming what, in thenbsp;language of Botanists, is a hymenium porosum.

is to these plants that we would compare our ^ussil; especially the spots at a, a, showing dotsnbsp;Arranged methodically, to portions of the hymenium

porosum. It may be supposed, that the Fossil shews the upper surface, or the pileus; the hy-menium being prevented by its pores from separating from the shale so as to leave an impression.nbsp;In that case, b, c, will be portions from whichnbsp;the cuticle has been torn, and a a, will be stillnbsp;deeper wounds, which, having passed right throughnbsp;the pileus, lay bare that portion of the hymeniurnnbsp;porosum, which was connected with the pileus.

For the purpose of ascertaining what the effect would be of compressing a recent Fungus of thisnbsp;description, we took a withered dry specimen ofnbsp;the common Polyporus versicolor from off a decayed stump, and having enclosed it in plaster ofnbsp;Pans, we separated the mould so formed, whennbsp;we obtained such an appearance as is representednbsp;at A.; the spaces a were, however, only madenbsp;visible by scraping through the pileus with ^nbsp;sharp penknife.

The principal objection to this Fossil being really a Fungus, analogous to those with whichnbsp;we have compared it, consists in the lines in thenbsp;spaces b, c, fig. B. 2. not being in accordancenbsp;with the radial lines near the margin. It mightynbsp;indeed, be supposed, that the former have beeonbsp;caused by the pressure of another Fungus lying i�nbsp;a somewhat different direction ; to this, however�nbsp;several objections will obviously present themselves ; or, it may be assumed, that the pilec�nbsp;was composed, internally, of two or three layer��

With these very unsatisfactory Notes, we com-l�^end our Fossil to the enquiries of our readers; I'emarking only, that if it is a Fungus, it is perhapsnbsp;the first that has been discovered in the Coalnbsp;Flora, and that it may be worth consideringnbsp;whether the Carfolithes umbonatus of Sternberg,nbsp;referred with doubt to Cyclopteris by Adolphenbsp;firongniart, may not also be something of anbsp;similar nature.

Among the rocks of the Oolitic series, appear, for the first time, remains of plants related to anbsp;tribe called, by Botanists, Cycadese.* In theirnbsp;*'0cent state they are small plants, having a thick,nbsp;fleshy, roundish, or oblong, or occasionally cylin-flrical and elongated stem, which is never branched,nbsp;^od which is covered with a hard dry coating ofnbsp;Scales, that once were the bases of leaves that havenbsp;tallen off. Their leaves are of a hard leatherynbsp;texture, are divided in a pinnated manner, andnbsp;quot;'hen young are curled up at the points like thosenbsp;ferns ; their veins are, in all cases, undivided,

and proceed in nearly parallel lines from the base to the apex of the segments. These plants are increased by means of male and female flowers,nbsp;which are dioecious, and collected in terminalnbsp;cones, composed of scales, after the manner of anbsp;Pine-cone. They inhabit countries having a tropical, or sub-tropical temperature, especially thenbsp;Cape of Good Hope, the West Indies, and Southnbsp;America, and are capable of enduring the extremity of drought without injury.

Of the Oolitic formation they are the characteristic plants, indicating a climate totally different from that which must have been prevalent when the Coal-measure plants were produced,nbsp;and, in all probability, by no means unfit for thenbsp;habitation of man.

The stems of these plants are known, when in a fossil state, by the name of � Birds� Nests theirnbsp;characteristic marks, and the proofs of their analogy with modern species, have been amply eX'nbsp;plained by Professor Buckland, in the Transactionsnbsp;of the Geological Society.

Their leaves were, when first discovered, mistaken for fern leaves, from which they are known by their pinnated mode of division, combined ivithnbsp;simple veins, which have the arrangement abovenbsp;described.

No remains of their fructification have hitherto been identified in a satisfactory manner. It is, however, not improbable that the impressions found

Hl the Oolite, having somewhat the appc^arance of a large flower, one of which is represented bynbsp;Messrs. Young and Bird, (t. 1. f. 1. and 7.) arenbsp;fragments of this fossil cone, broken transversely.nbsp;If this be so, the parts called petals, in suchnbsp;fossils, will be the scales of the cone, and thenbsp;stamens, and pistillum, will be the fracturednbsp;axis.*

Of the fossil impressions of this tribe, some represent the segments of the leaves, connected with the general midrib only by the middle of theirnbsp;base : these are referred, by Adolphe Brongniart,nbsp;to his genus Zamia; all others have the segmentsnbsp;Connected with the general midrib by the wholenbsp;of their base; they are not, however, on that account, combined into one other genus; but asnbsp;they possess certain well-marked modifications ofnbsp;the veins, they are separated into three genera,nbsp;distinguished thus :�

To the genus Pterophyllum, belongs the subject of the accompanying plate. The specimen is from the shale of the cliflf at Gristhorpe, near Scarborough, and was communicated by Mr. Bean.

* We have also been obliged with a cast of one of these �'ossils, taken in plaster of Paris by Mr. Williamson, thenbsp;*^ctive and intelligent Curator of the Scarborough Museum.

The leaf appears to have been about 11 inches long-, and to have been widest at a short distancenbsp;below the apex, which is destroyed : at the basenbsp;it gradually tapers into a stalk. The segments, innbsp;the widest part of the leaf, are about an inch long,nbsp;are rounded at the end, and slightly curved forwards, so as to have a somewhat falcate appearance ; they vary in width from three to nearlynbsp;six lines, and as they approach the base becomenbsp;altogether truncate.

minus. Ad. Brongn. in Annales des Sciences, vol. 4. p. 219. t. 12. /. 8. Prodr. p. 95.

From the Upper Sandstone of the Oolitic rocks Scarborough. Our specimen is in the collectionnbsp;the Geological Society.

This species was first detected in a small Collection of Fossil Plants found in the Sandstone quarries at Hor, a village to the North ofnbsp;^tind, in Sweden. It is well characterized by itsnbsp;'^a.rrow leaves, and short, broad, truncated segments, which are extremely unequal in size,nbsp;rongniart represents their margin as absolutely

NEUROPTERIS RECENTIOR.

The genera Odontopteris and Neuropteris are known from each other by the veins of the formernbsp;proceeding into the segments directly from theirnbsp;base, without collecting into a distinct midrib,nbsp;and by the veins of the latter gradually divergingnbsp;from the midrib as they approach the point of thenbsp;segments. In general appearance, the two genera are extremely alike, and their species havenbsp;sometimes a most remarkable resemblance, asnbsp;the present with Odontopteris Brardii, and the

This must have been a fern of large size. Its rachis in one part is nearly half an inch in diameter; but it must be observed, that in manynbsp;fossil ferns that part is much thicker in proportionnbsp;to the lateral branches from it, and to the size ofnbsp;the whole leaf, than in recent species. It was,nbsp;probably, tripinnate; the last pinnse were morenbsp;than six inches long, and very narrow; the segments attached to the midrib by their wholenbsp;base, having an oblong falcate figure, seeming tonbsp;have been blunt, and about half an inch long-The remains of the veins are very indistinet, butnbsp;seem to have been arranged as represented in ournbsp;figure.

The leaf was either bipinnate, or tripinnate; its rachis was slender, and quite in the modern proportion to the lateral branches from it. The pinnaenbsp;are so broken, that it is impossible to tell theirnbsp;length, but they seem to have exceeded six inchesnbsp;in the lower part of that portion of the leaf comprehended in oujr plate. The segments werenbsp;United to the principal midrib by their whole base,nbsp;from which they tapered upwards into a falcatenbsp;lanceolate figure, having its margin distinctly

toothed beyond the middle; the length of the segments was rather more than half an inch, andnbsp;their breadth, at the base, about two and a half, ornbsp;three lines.

SIGILLARIA ORGANUM.

From Jarrow Colliery.

This species, although published by Count Sternberg, is not taken up by Adolphe Brong-niart. It ditFers from S. pachydermUy already represented at tab. 54 and 55 of this work, in thenbsp;scars of the corticated specimen being round,nbsp;instead of angular, and in those of the decorticatednbsp;specimens being mere dots, instead of a halfnbsp;circle.

The accompanying figure represents both the surface of the wood, and that of the bark; thenbsp;latter of which is much thinner than that ofnbsp;S. pachyderma.

Neither in this, nor in any other instance that we have seen, is there any trace of articulations at regular distances; and, nevertheless, fromnbsp;the state in which Sigillarise often occur, onenbsp;would be led to expect such a structure ; for theynbsp;are commonly broken across, as if such were thenbsp;case. This was particularly remarked in a groupenbsp;of such stems, which were met with in largenbsp;quantities, (as many as 10 in 16 yards,) whilenbsp;driving a store drift in Jarrow Colliery.

This plate represents the fossil figured at t. 57, the state in which it existed before its bark wasnbsp;destroyed.

It will be remarked, that, while the scars upon *�^6 decorticated specimen consist of two distinctnbsp;'^val spaces, of a regular figure and size, thosenbsp;'^pon the outside of the bark had a roundish figure,nbsp;^ut slightly indented at the two opposite sides.

Such specimens as this, in which all the sharp-^^ess of the angles of the recent plant is completely preserved, shew, in a very satisfactory �banner, that they cannot have been long agitatednbsp;Water before they were deposited; and that,nbsp;a 2

if they were originally drifted at all, it'can only have been for very inconsiderable distances, lonbsp;our judgment, they are sufficient alone to destroynbsp;the theories of those who fancy that the remainsnbsp;of tropical plants, found embedded in Europe, mustnbsp;have been drifted by currents from equatorial regions.

Communicated by M. De Cardonnel Lawson, Esq., from a sand-stone quarry, of the Coal-formation, at Cramlington, in Northumberland.

This is so like a single rib, or fluting, of a Sigil-laria, that it is difficult to believe it can be any thing else; and yet it is as difficult to understandnbsp;how one longitudinal portion of a Sigillaria shouldnbsp;be separated from another, in the way this hasnbsp;been separated; for not only is there not thenbsp;smallest trace of tearing, but the whole specimen stands out in very high relief. The outernbsp;coating is coal; the scars project in pairs, morenbsp;than the one-eighth part of an inch from the surface of the fossil.

� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.�0[ ' , -fn /hf�Oi� �-. -� �r^'- Clt;' gt;:[ :':'

.��T'�-* d'l;'' 'gt;� oil** j',' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�quot;?' ;'�'*9'^0;;/�

	'19	'
		.fi
	�t�-
		' Ctamp;iS/
jj.'iy	' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;t
r;		V . r. . . '

..rtv/otii'/ifj /bidw'Jo aiiii-;--

73, 74, 75.

? Palmacites variolatus. Schloth. petrefakt. t. 15. f, 3. A. Sigillaria tessellata. Ad. Brmign. Prodr. p. 65.

This curious fossil was first noticed by the Rev. Henry Steinhauer, in the work above referrednbsp;to, where a fragment, in iron-stone, is representednbsp;from Shelf.

What seems to be the same thing, was afterwards figured by Baron von Schlotheim, from the Coal mines of Essen, in Westphalia, and fromnbsp;Wettin; but, in both these instances, very indifferent specimens were all that had been met with.

For being able to publish the truly beautiful figures at t. 73 and 74, and for the followingnbsp;description, we are indebted to J. E. Bowman,nbsp;Esq. of the Court, near Wrexham.

The fossil is of fine-grained Sandstone, and was found in a bed of the same, overlying thenbsp;Coal strata, at Garthen Colliery, near Ruabon,nbsp;Denbighshire. The whole was about a yard long,nbsp;of which this alone was preserved.

It retains, on one side, some of the carbonized vegetable substance, which, also, fills the cavitiesnbsp;of many of the scars; it is clearly and beautifullynbsp;detached from its matrix on three sides, and somewhat flattened, so that a transverse section wouldnbsp;be an oval. The rows of scars run longitudinally,nbsp;or parallel with the axis of the stem, with beautiful regularity, each row being separated by anbsp;groove; the rows are narrower, and more stronglynbsp;marked on the sides, which, from its shape, wouldnbsp;appear to have been subjected to the least pressure, or, at the narrow ends of a transverse ovalnbsp;section. The scars in the middle of the areas, arenbsp;somewhat club-shaped; the central lobe muchnbsp;elongated, and very various in width, and not sonbsp;deeply sunk as the shorter lateral ones.

Narrowest diameter at the narrow end, or apex, 2^ inches ; but, here, it has been exposed to somenbsp;greater additional pressure; and there is an additional irregularity in the surface.

It appears to have been the stem of some plant, the leaves of which were placed so close together,nbsp;that their bases, which were square, were in contact. In the total absence of almost all information beyond that which we have given, it is impossible to offer even a guess as to its probable affinity,nbsp;further, than that it was Dicotyledonous, with annbsp;ultra-tropical constitution.

Possibly, it was allied to Sigillaria, with which Adolphe Brongniart combines it; and this is, innbsp;some measure, confirmed by the presence of bark,nbsp;as is shewn at t. 74. But it does not appear tonbsp;us advisable to unite it wdth that genus; onnbsp;the contrary, we should geologically distinguishnbsp;this Favularia elegans, and some others, fromnbsp;Sigillaria, by the highly important circumstancenbsp;of the leaves having been in contact at their base,nbsp;as is proved by their scars. When growing, thenbsp;appearance of the two genera must have beennbsp;very different on that account; for, while Sigillaria had its stem loosely furnished with leaves,

after the manner of the common forms of plants of the present day, Favularia must have been anbsp;mass of densely imbricated foliage.

This specimen is a further proof, that neither the period which intervened between its removalnbsp;and final deposit, nor the distance it was drifted,nbsp;could have been considerable. Its angles arenbsp;as sharp as if it had been newly gathered.

Tab. 74, represents the scars of their natural size. Both these are from the pencil of Mr.nbsp;Bowman.

Tab. 75, is an old and worn specimen, from the Bensham Coal-seam, in Jarrow Colliery; thenbsp;principal part of it is decorticated, and has a circular depression in the centre of each scar, insteadnbsp;of the long conical spot, which is found in thenbsp;same situation on the outside of the perfect bark.

Fruits are, as is well known, extremely rare in the old Coal-formation, if we except the fossilsnbsp;called Lepidostrobi; a few specimens, apparentlynbsp;belonging to Monocotyledones, and this genus,nbsp;Cardiocarpon, being the only others that are mentioned by authors.

The species now represented, occurs, occasionally, in the shale, and always, or, at least, most commonly, in groupes; as is the case in thenbsp;present instance. This circumstance makes itnbsp;probable, that they were clustered together, whennbsp;they were growing on the plant, and that they

were either deposited where they grew, or that they had been drifted but a short distance.

Each grain is lenticular, always acute at one end, and sometimes so at the other, but morenbsp;generally obtuse. The acute end (d) appears tonbsp;have been the apex, and the obtuse end the base.

The face of the grains exhibits two distinct appearances. In some, there is a slightly elevated line running through the axis, from base to apex,nbsp;and a little scar placed at the very base, acrossnbsp;the elevated line, which is perpendicular to it,nbsp;and which seems to rise out of it. Others have,nbsp;distinctly, a circle (c) within the margin, thenbsp;axis of which is traversed by a line {b), which,nbsp;at its upper end, has the distinct remains of anbsp;small double scar {a.) The former appear to benbsp;grains seen from the outside; the latter from thenbsp;inside.

Such being the structure of these grains, as far as they retain any decided characters, we are justified in coming to the following conclusions aboutnbsp;them.

They were didymous ; that is to say, they grew in pairs, applied by their faces, c being the linenbsp;of their commissure, h the impression of theirnbsp;woody axis, and a the scars caused by the passage of the vessels of the axis into each grain.

is to be presumed, that the little scar, described as existing upon the outside, at the base of thenbsp;grains, indicates the former presence of a calyx atnbsp;that place.

Little positive, unfortunately, can be concluded from these data, either as to the analogy of Car-diocarpon with recent genera, or as to the fossilnbsp;genus to which it must belong.

It was, probably. Dicotyledonous: for, if it had been Monocotyledonous, the grains wouldnbsp;have been more likely to adhere by threes, thannbsp;by pairs. The most striking analogy that occursnbsp;to us, is with UmhelHfera; to which, however, itnbsp;cannot have belonged, if we are right in considering the calyx inferior. Had we not ascertainednbsp;the character of the inner face of the grains, wenbsp;might have been induced to suspect some affinitynbsp;with CrucifercE; but the commissure, and othernbsp;characters of the inside face, render this impossible. StdlatcE might, also, be thought to resemblenbsp;it, if it were not for the inferior calyx ; but, uponnbsp;the whole, we incline to the belief, that, like manynbsp;other genera of the Coal sera, it has no verynbsp;positive modern analogy.

As to the fossil genera to which it may be supposed to belong, we would, in the first place, remark, that it is impossible Cardiocarpon should be the fruit of Lepidodendron, or any other Lyco-podiaceous genus, as Adolphe Brongniart hasnbsp;conjectured; this is sufficiently proved, by the

didymous structure of the fruit, independently of many other considerations. To what other generanbsp;it may belong, we do not feel capable of offeringnbsp;any decided opinion. Supposing it to have fallennbsp;from the stem of some species of Asterophyllites;nbsp;then, one might indulge in the suspicion of thatnbsp;genus having been related to Callitriche.

Calamites approximatus. Sternb. Flora der Vorto. fase. 4. p. 26. Schloth. Petrefakt. p. 399. Artis Antediluv. Phyt. t. 4.nbsp;Ad. Brongn, Hist, des V�g. Foss. 1. 133. t. 24. and t. 15.nbsp;�. 7. 8.

From the shale of Jarrow Colliery. Mr. Artis had it from the soft sandstone, in Hober Quarry,nbsp;near Wentworth; Von Schlotheim from the Coalnbsp;Mines of Manebach, Essen, Saarbruck, andnbsp;Wettin; and Adolphe Brongniart, from thosenbsp;of Alais in the Department of the Gard, of Li�ge,nbsp;of Kilkenny, and of Saint Etienne in the Department of the Loire; and, finally, from the Copper

It is thought to be readily known from most others, by the very close joints of the stem; but

it appears, from the specimen now represented, that this approximation of joints is not universal;nbsp;on the contrary, those towards the upper end arenbsp;as distant as in other species.

Up to this time, we believe that no one has seen what can be certainly considered the rootsnbsp;of a Calamite. As every thing which tends tonbsp;the elucidation of the nature of this singular genusnbsp;is highly interesting, we have peculiar satisfactionnbsp;in, at length, being able to state what they are.

Of the three specimens represented in the accompanying plate, A has the joints of its extremity but little contracted ; and, from the basenbsp;of the lowest articulation but one, there springsnbsp;an arm, with a descending direction, which isnbsp;irregularly branched; from the articulation abovenbsp;this, springs another arm of the same nature.nbsp;These are, most undoubtedly, roots, as is provednbsp;by the absence of all trace of symmetry in their

mode of ramifying. It, therefore, would seem from this, that the lower end of a Calamite hasnbsp;no contraction of the joints, but, on the contrary,nbsp;has them pretty regularly elongated. C we takenbsp;to be another instance of roots; in this, however, thenbsp;specimen is much less distinctly preserved; but,nbsp;at B, where the articulations become graduallynbsp;shorter as we approach the end, we have appearances so similar to the supposed roots of C, thatnbsp;it is difficult not to believe them, also, to be ofnbsp;that nature; and if this be the fact, then it wouldnbsp;appear, that the test of the root end of a Calamitenbsp;has still to be sought for, and that neither thenbsp;lengthened nor shortened joints are characteristic.nbsp;But to this we have to recur in the next subject.

We are uncertain to what species to refer these fragments; possibly, they are small specimensnbsp;of C. arenaceus.

Calamites cannaeformis. Schloth. Petrefaktenk. 398. t. 20. �. 1. Sternb. Flora der Vorw. fase. 4. p. 26. Ad. Brongn. Hist,nbsp;des V�g�t. Fnss. 131. lt;.21.

C. Pseudo-bambusia. Stemb. Flora der Vorw. t.l3.f.3. Artis Antediluv. Phytol. t. 6.

This is one of the commonest species, being found in almost every Coal-field in Europe.

It is readily known by its smooth surface, its distant furrows, which usually terminate acutely,nbsp;and by its usually curved tapering figure.

We have placed the drawing now given of it in the position which it should have, if the longnbsp;cylindrical bodies proceeding from it were leaves,nbsp;and the specimen itself the apex of a branch. But

we are rather inclined to believe it to be the base of a stem, and the cylindrical bodies to be roots;nbsp;for if we compare it with fig. B., in tab. 78, thenbsp;resemblance is so great, that we can scarcely failnbsp;to recognize it; and it is next to certain, thatnbsp;that fossil is a root end. Besides, it will be remarked, that the tubercles which terminate thenbsp;ribs of the stem, originate near the points mostnbsp;remote from the apparent apex; but it is a constant law in vegetation, that leaves originate fromnbsp;that end of a joint which is next to the real apex;nbsp;and there can be little doubt, that these tubercles,nbsp;because of their regular arrangement, indicate thenbsp;seat of rudimentary leaves. If this reasoning benbsp;correct, then the accompanying figure is reversed,nbsp;and it is to be considered the base of the stem ofnbsp;Calamites cannaeformis.

From these remarks, one useful conclusion may be drawn; namely, that the position of the tubercles upon the stem of a Calamites, affords the onlynbsp;certain evidence of base and apex ; the end atnbsp;which they are seated, will always be the uppernbsp;end. This is confirmatory of Adolphe Brong-niart�s opinion, that those curious rounded ends ofnbsp;Calamites, with contracted joints, and short widenbsp;ribs, which are frequently met with in collections,nbsp;are the bases of stems, and not their upper ends,nbsp;as Artis, and others, have imagined.

809

•^1

.J

,^!

Fi^'sr,

FOSSIL FLORA

GREAT BRITAIN;

JOHN LINDLEY, Ph. D. amp;c. amp;c.

WILLIAM HUTTON, F.G.S. amp;c.

VOLUME I.

LONDON:

JAMES RIDOWAY, PICCADILLY.

RODERICK IMPEY MURCHISON, Esq.

PREFACE.

b 3

GENERA OF FOSSIL PLANTS.

xir

Genus 55.

us 66.

Ad. Br. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.

One species-in the Coal formatron.

Flants,

Ij;;: � v,gt;�� :� : - nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�.''??

LIST O? STJBSCKlBETtS.

^ . -p fl.s. Conl ^ Hing-

PINITES BRANDLINGI. WIDEOPEN FOSSIL TREE.

. -yvliich the

oompression, which generally ha

F�f. 2.

10

12

Pi� 2.

A CRAIGLEITH FOSSIL BRANCH.

17

19

20

21

ULODENDRON MAJUS.

c'.

i'

■'■*0

23

4. � nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.#�

� �% gt; ....-

-.sf

fl

i'�-

,-v

The specimen from which this in shale; W the root of the highnbsp;ft South Shields Colliery,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Edinhurgh

That figured by Mr. Allan,

LEPIDODENDKOH DILATATUM.

LEPIDODENDRON ? ACEROS�M.

■M

10

12

�6.

13

43

Pw 2.

P�a- 1

14

ASTEROPHYLLITES TUBERCULATA.

From, the shale forming the roof of the Low Main coal seam, in Felling Colliery, near Newcastle.

47

-rwwifii

ff:

rquot;

■ ■^dï;

S;r«'-

15�16

53

,'*ir

;,�A

18

%:

19

Asterophyllites.

ASTEROPHYLLITES GRANDIS.

\ ;

-;;v

.Tr-/� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;