The Reference Library is open from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. on such days as the Lending Librarynbsp;may be open.

Book'i may be obtained to read in the Reference Keadiua Room by filling up a Reader�s Ticket, but books so obtained must be returnednbsp;to the Librarian or his Assistants, and not takennbsp;from the Library.

No Reader shall be alloA'ed to trace any p�ate or engraving, and in making extracts, specialnbsp;care must be observed in the use of pencils, sonbsp;that the works may be in no way injured.

Readers will be responsible for any damage or injury done to the Books issued to them, andnbsp;shall be required to replace the same or pay theirnbsp;value. Persons so supplying new copies shall benbsp;entitled to the damaged copy on depositing thenbsp;new one.

tC-w-

MP]SOZOIC PLANTS

BRITISH AIUSEUAI

THE JURASSIC FLORA.

PLATES I-XXI.

A. C. SEWAED, M.A., F.R.S., F.G.S.,

PRINTED BY ORDER OF THE TRUSTEES.

U. QUARITCH, 15, PICCADILLY. DDLAU AND CO., 37, SOHO SQUARE, W. KEOAN PAUL AND CO., CHARING CROSS ROAD, W.C.

HERTFORD

PREFACE.

The principal source of the fine series of Jurassic plants from the Yorkshire Coast, now preserved in the Britishnbsp;^luseum, was the collection of the late Mr. William Bean,nbsp;of Scarborough, acquired by purchase in 1859. Onlynbsp;a portion of this collection, however, is in the Britishnbsp;Museum, the remainder being in the Yorkshire Philosophical Society�s Museum at York.

Mr. Bean was an enthusiastic collector, and by means of his vast store of duplicate fossil plants he was able tonbsp;make exchanges with many foreign museums. Specimensnbsp;bearing labels in his well-known bandwriting also existnbsp;in museums and private collections all over Britain.

A former resident of Scarborough, Dr. Murray, also gave many specimens to the British Museum in the early days,nbsp;from Gristhorpe Bay and elsewhere along the Yorkshirenbsp;coast.

The plant-bearing Oolitic shales of Yorkshire are much more friable than those of the Coal-measures. This maynbsp;possibly explain the difficulty experienced in some instancesnbsp;in identifying �types,� many of the specimens having beennbsp;broken up and their parts separated, or even destroyed, bynbsp;time and frequent removals.

The Oolitic plant-remains of Yorkshire are of peculiar interest, many of them having been carefully studied by

Brongniart, Lindley, Hutton, Saporta, and other Palsoo-botanists of note, and it is very gratifying to find that so accomplished a botanist as Mr. A. C. Seward has nownbsp;undertaken to Catalogue the Collection in the Geologicalnbsp;Department which has remained for so long a time withoutnbsp;a historian.

AUTHOR�S PREFACE.

Specimens of Jurassic plants from Gristliorpe Bay and other famous localities on the Yorkshire coast are metnbsp;with in nearly every Museum in Britain, as well as innbsp;several continental collections. I have endeavoured tonbsp;supplement the data afforded by the specimens in thenbsp;British Museum by examining collections in other places:nbsp;frequent allusion will be found in the descriptive part ofnbsp;this Catalogue to important types in provincial or continentalnbsp;museums. The Museums of Cambridge, Oxford, York,nbsp;Scarborough, Whitby, Manchester, Newcastle, and Leedsnbsp;are rich in Yorkshire Coast plants, and good collectionsnbsp;have been examined also in Paris, Stockholm, Lund, andnbsp;elsewhere. The British Museum series and the Leckenbynbsp;Collection in the Geological Museum, Cambridge, arenbsp;probably the richest in large and well-preserved specimens,nbsp;but the other museums, especially those of Scarborough,nbsp;Whitby, York, and Manchester, contain much material ofnbsp;considerable value. The identification of type-specimensnbsp;has often heen a difficult task: some of the specimensnbsp;are probably lost; many have suffered considerably, partlynbsp;through insufficient care having been exercised in theirnbsp;preservation and, to some extent, as the result of thenbsp;natural breaking up of the shale in which the fossiksnbsp;occur. My search for type-specimens, which has often been

fruitless, has afforded a practical demonstration of the need of some system for the centralization and cataloguingnbsp;of all specimens, which have served for the diagnosis ornbsp;illustration of new species.

I desire to convey my hearty thanks to those in charge of the museums I have visited for their kindness in affordingnbsp;me every facility in the examination of collections, and fornbsp;their willingness to assist ray work in various waj^s. Amongnbsp;continental friends who have aided me I wdsh to expressnbsp;my gratitude to Professor Nathorst, who generously placednbsp;at ray disposal some unpublished drawings of specimensnbsp;collected by himself ; also to Dr. Renault and Professornbsp;Zeiller, of Paris, who enabled me to obtain access to thenbsp;Jurassic plants under their charge.

My thanks are due to Miss Woodward for the care with which she has executed the drawings published in thisnbsp;volume; to my wife I am also indebted for some of thenbsp;drawings reproduced in the text, which were made fromnbsp;specimens in the museums of Whitby, Scarborough, andnbsp;York. The photograph reproduced in Text-figure 34 wasnbsp;kindly taken for me by Mr. Gepp, of the Botanicalnbsp;Department.

The Councils of the Royal Society and the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester have allowed me tonbsp;borrow process-blocks originally used in their publications,nbsp;and the Syndics of the Cambridge University Pressnbsp;generously gave me permission to use several blocks innbsp;their possession.

NOTE.

The numbers in brackets after the Authors� names in the footnotes refer to the year of publication of the work quoted.

A bibliography at the end of the volume includes the books and papers cited in the text.

LIST OF FIGURES IN THE TEXT.

lOTRODUCTIOK

The Jurassic plant-bearing strata exposed in tbe cliff sections of the Yorkshire coast, between Whitby and a few miles southnbsp;of Scarborough, have afforded unusually rich data towards anbsp;restoration of the characteristics and composition of a certainnbsp;facies of Mesozoic vegetation. The abundance of specimens innbsp;European museums and the descriptions of several British species innbsp;the works of Brongniart, Sternberg, Zigno, and other Continentalnbsp;palaeobotanists, bear testimony to the wealth of material obtainednbsp;from these Inferior Oolite rocks. The following passage from thenbsp;first volume of Sohimper�s Trait� de paleontologie v�g�tale illustratesnbsp;the importance, which this eminent palaeobotanist attached to thenbsp;investigation of the English Jurassic flora :�� On ne saurait asseznbsp;recommander aux paleontologistes anglais Tetude approfondie de lanbsp;flore fossile de I�oolithe de Yorkshire. C�est une des flores lesnbsp;plus int�ressantes, a cause de sa grande ressemblance avec la florenbsp;de la formation rh�tique et du lias inf�rieur et a cause de sonnbsp;rapport avec la flore cr�tac�e. Les descriptions et les figures quenbsp;nous en possedons sont insufflsantes pour arriver d une delimitationnbsp;rigoureuse des genres et des esp�ces. Aussi ai-je du passer sousnbsp;silence un certain nombre de oes derni�res f aute de donn�es exactes. � �'nbsp;In the present volume an attempt is made to describe in detailnbsp;the several elements composing the Jurassic flora of East Yorkshire,nbsp;and to furnish a general sketch of the geographical distributionnbsp;and botanical affinities of the vegetation represented by the Lowernbsp;Oolite plants of this area.

We may begin' this brief historical survey of our knowledge of the Jurassic plants of Yorkshire with a reference to the well-known memoir by Young amp; Bird � A Geological Swrvey of thenbsp;Yorlcshire Coast,published at Whitby in 1822. Mr. John Birdnbsp;was Curator of the Whitby Museum, and the Eev. G. Youngnbsp;acted as one of the Secretaries of the Whitby Literary andnbsp;Philosophical Society. The first part of this work deals with thenbsp;geological structure of the strata which are described under variousnbsp;heads, such as the upper shales, oolitic limestone, second shale,nbsp;ironstone and sandstone, blue limestone, sandstone, shale andnbsp;coal, and Dogger; but most of these descriptive terms have notnbsp;been adhered to by later geologists. In the second part a briefnbsp;description is attempted of the organic remains, a few fossil plantsnbsp;being represented by crude coloured drawings ; the type-specimensnbsp;are preserved in the Whitby Museum, and a recent examinationnbsp;of the collection enabled me to identify most of the originals ofnbsp;Bird�s figures. The second edition of the Geological Surveynbsp;of the Yorkshire Coast, which appeared in 1828, contains variousnbsp;additional drawings of fossil plants.�� The plants are comparednbsp;with several recent genera such as Asplenium, Scolopendrium,nbsp;Mippuris, Cynaria, Gn,aphalium, and others, or they are merelynbsp;spoken of as fragments of ferns or loaves. Eeference is made tonbsp;the figures of Young amp; Bird in the description of several speciesnbsp;dealt with in the following pages.

It has been truly said that � Young amp; Bird�s work did much to arouse the desire for geological pursuits, which eventually lednbsp;to the establishment of the Museums at Whitby and Scarborough,nbsp;and to the formation of such collections of fossils as were madenbsp;by Bean, Williamson, and others.� ¹ ² The enthusiasm of these andnbsp;other local naturalists resulted in the accumulation of rich collections, and, indeed, nearly the whole of the material at present

1 For a more complete history of our knowledge of the Jurassic rocks of East Yorkshire vide Fox-Straugways (92'), and for bibliographies of Jurassicnbsp;literature vide also Phillips (75), Fox-Strangways (88), etc.

available for the study of the fossil flora of East Yorkshire was obtained by their means. It is to be regretted that very littlenbsp;serious collecting has been undertaken during the last half-century ;nbsp;some of the famous localities which afforded so rich a harvest sixtynbsp;or seventy years ago are probably almost worked out, but there isnbsp;Undoubtedly much valuable material to be found if local enthusiasmnbsp;Were again aroused. William Bean and his nephew John Williamsonnbsp;rendered excellent service in the early days of the geologicalnbsp;exploration of the Yorkshire coast: the characteristic handwritingnbsp;of the former is met with in most of our Museums on the labelsnbsp;of Yorkshire fossil plants; the latter began life as a gardener atnbsp;Scarborough,^ and afterwards became Curator of the Scarboroughnbsp;Museum, which owes many of its treasures to his skill as a scientificnbsp;collector. John Williamson in later life was assisted in his natural-history work by his son William Crawford Williamson, whosenbsp;brilliant palaeobotanical researches date from his boyish days, whennbsp;his father�s zeal led him to take a share in interpreting thenbsp;records of Jurassic life. The elder Williamson was acquaintednbsp;with William Smith, whose name will always be prominentlynbsp;associated with Jurassic geology,�� and with Smith�s nephew, Johnnbsp;Phillips^ whose work on the Yorkshire Coast is one of the Englishnbsp;classics. Adolphe Brongniart^ was at this period engaged on hisnbsp;famous work on the history of fossil plants, and as the recognizednbsp;authority received various Yorkshire specimens for identification,nbsp;some of which he figured and described.

The following list includes the East Yorkshire species described ty Brongniart in 1828

* The parentheses enclosing an author�s name indicate that the generic name lias been altered since the institution of the species [vide Seward (98), p. 111].

P. tenuis nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;|nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;=nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Toditesnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Williamsoni (Brongn.).

P. Murrayana = Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.) and Sphenopteris Murrayana (Brongn.).

P. athyroides = ? Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.) or Sphenopteris Murrayana (Brongn.).

Phlebopteris polypodioides '� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;7-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. .nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;7nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;� 7nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/r�nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\

Phillips� Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire -was published in 1829, dedicated hy an � afieotionate nephew and grateful pupil �nbsp;to Williani Smith. Phillips� hook marked an important advancenbsp;on that of Young amp; Bird, and placed the geology of Eastnbsp;Yorkshire on a sound scientific basis; he included the planthearing strata in the �Bath Oolite formation,� the term Oolitenbsp;having been first applied to these rocks hy Smith. The stratanbsp;are classified by Phillips as follows:�

In the first edition of Phillips� work the respective positions of the grey limestone and millepore bed are confused, so that thenbsp;Gristhorpe plant-bed,� which is now included in the middlenbsp;estuarine series, was placed in the upper division.This mistake wasnbsp;first pointed out by the late Professor Williamson,^ and correctednbsp;in the later edition of Phillips� book. Phillips speaks of the fossil

� John 'Williamson is usually credited with the discovery of the famous Gristhorpe plant-bed. In a letter written to Lindley in 1832, William Beannbsp;asserts that he was �the first discoverer� of this bed. (I am indebted tonbsp;Professor Lehour for an opportunity of reading Bean�s letter.)

plants as belonging chiefly to �the natural monocotyledonous Orders, Filices, Lyoopodiacese, Equisetacese, and Cycadacese,� withnbsp;associated fragments of dicotyledonous species. The plant-hearingnbsp;sediments he describes as principally such as might be deposited bynbsp;rivers varying in force, and subject to intervals of feebler action.nbsp;The drawings of the plants are in many cases far from accurate,nbsp;and it is not an easy matter to recognize the original specimens.nbsp;Some of Phillips� type-specimens appear to have been lost, butnbsp;others have been identified in the York Museum and elsewhere.nbsp;In 1875 a third and much enlarged edition of Phillips� memoir wasnbsp;published under the editorship of Mr. Pohert Etheridge. Professornbsp;Thillips did not live to see the publication of the third edition ofnbsp;his work; the concluding paragraph of the preface, written innbsp;1874, the year of his death, is worthy of repetition.^

� The Yorkshire coast has ever been my delight : to sketch its romantic promontories, to climb and measure its cliffs, tonbsp;investigate its numerous fossils and its rich variety of marine life,nbsp;may he recommended to every lover of natural beauty and to everynbsp;student of natural history. To them I bequeath what has been tonbsp;me a labour of love, a life-long enjoyment�the study of the greatnbsp;Mesozoic section here so plainly cut,�not doubting that kindlynbsp;thoughts will accompany the corrections and additions which timenbsp;has brought, and still must bring, to the work which I now consignnbsp;to their use.�

The following list includes the species enumerated in the last edition, together with the names used in the first edition and theirnbsp;modem equivalents adopted in the present Catalogue. I have alsonbsp;added the name of the museum where the figured specimens maynbsp;he seen, but there are still several species of which the originalsnbsp;have not been discovered.^

F. erectus.^ Leek. (Type in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge.) = M. erectus. Fquisetites columnaris^ Brongu. = Fquisetites columnaris.

* For a biographical notice of Phillips vide Geological Magazine, vol. vii. p. 301, 1870.

Some of Phillips� type-specimens are referred to by Platnauer (91) as being in the York Museum.

Solenites Murrayanus, L. amp; H. ( �Flabellaria viminea, Phill., 1829 ; type in the ? Whitby Museum, No. 2493) = Czehanoivskia Murrayana (L. amp; H.).

B. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;microphylla, Phill. (Type-specimen in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge.)

Cyclopteris hngifolia, Phill. (= Sphenopteris longifolia, Phill., 1829; type-specimen in the York Museum) = Baiera Phillipsi, Nath.

C. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;digitata, Brongn. (= Sphenopteris latifolia, Phill., 1829; figured specimen

Bichopteris lanceolaia (= Neuropteris lanceolata, Phill., 1829 ; figured specimen in the York Museum) = Pachypteris lanceolata., Brongn.

B. Imigata, Lign. (= Neuropteris laevigata, Phill., 1829) = Pachypteris lanceolata.

P. PhilUpsii, Brongn. (= Phyllites nervulosa, Phill., 1829 ; type of Phillips in the York Museum) = Bictyophyllum rugosum, L. amp; H.

Glossopteris Pkillipsii, Brongn. (= Pecopferis paucifolia, Phill., 1829 ; figured specimen in the York Museum) = Sagenopteris Phillipsi.

Marzaria Simpsoni, Phill. (Type-specimen in the Whitby Museum.) = ?Laccopteris polypodioides.

Tesniopteris major, L. amp; H. (= Aspleniopteris Nilssoni, Phill., 1829; figured specimen in the York Museum) = Tmniopteris major. [The specimen figurednbsp;by Phillips is an example of Anomozamites Nilssoni (Phill.).]

P. ccespitosa, Phill. (Type-specimen in the York Museum.) = Laccopteris polypodioides (Brongn.).

P. whitbiensis, Brongn. ( = P. kastata, Phill., 1829) = Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.).

P. dentata, L. amp; H. = Todites Williamsoni. [The specimen figured by Phillips is no doubt an example of Gladophlebis denticulata.^

P Williamsonis, Brongn. [ = P* curtata (pars), Phill., 1829] = Todites Williamsoni.

S. dissodalis, Phill. = C. hymenophyllo�des. yuinqueloha, Phill. = C. quinqueloha.nbsp;hymenophyllo�des, Brongn. = C. hymenophyllo�des.

'S'. arhusGula, Phill. = Sphenopteris Murrayana (pars), Brongn. arbusctila, var. = Coniopteris quinqueloha (Phill.).nbsp;denticulata, Brongn. = Sphenopteris Williamsoni, Brongn.

�S. Williamson�, Brongn. (= S. digitata, Phill., 1829; figured specimen in the York Museum) = (S'. Williamsoni-

S. muscoides, PhiU. (Type-specimen in the York Museum.) - Coniopteris hymenophyllo�des.

S.Jugleri, Leek. (Type-speeimen in the LeckenhyColl., Cambridge.) �Muffordia Goepp�rti (Dunk.).

A skeletonized fern-branch.��Phillips, 1829, pi. viii. fig. 18. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Inde

Ctenis falcata, L. amp; H. (= Cycadites suldcaulis,V\Mi., 1829; type-specimen ? in the York Museum) = Ctenis falcata^

Odontopteris Leckenbyi, Leek., ex Bean MS. (Type-specimen in the Leckenby Coll., Cambridge.) = Fiilozamites Leckenbyi.

Otozamites Beanii (L. amp; H.). (Figured specimen in the Leckenby Coll., Cambridge.) = Otozamites Beani.

0. obtusus (L. amp; H.) = 0, ohtusiis, var. ooliticus. [The type-specimen of 0. obtusus (L. amp; H.), from the Lias of Axminster, which is in the Oxfordnbsp;Museum, is not specifically identical with the Yorkshire plant.]

0. graphicus, l^eck., ex Bean MS. (Type-specimen in the Leckenby Coll., Cambridge.) = 0. graphicus.

0. gramineus, Phill. (The original of Zigno�s figure is in the Leckenby Coll., Cambridge.)

0. gracilis (Leek., ex Beau MS.). (Type-specimen in the Leckenby Coll., Cambridge.) = Williamsoniapecten (Phill.).

WiUiamsonia gigai (L. amp; H.). (Figured specimens in the AYhitby Museum,) = W. gigas.

Pterophyllum pectinoideum (Phill.). ( = Cycadites pectinoides^ Phill., 1829.) = WiUiamsonia pecten.

F. ienuieaule^ Phill. ( = Cycadites tenuieaiilis, Phil]., I ex Bean MS.). 1829)nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'

Walchia Williamsonis (Brongn.) (= Lycopodites uncifolius, Phill., 1829, and � spike of Lycopodites��'� ; original of latter, which is in the York Museum,nbsp;= male flower) = Pagiophyllum WilUamsoni.

8phlt;^reda paradoxa, L. amp; H. (and �winged seed,� Phillips, 1829) = Beania gracilis^ Carr.

� Unknown leaves,� Phillips, 1829, pi. vii. fig. 23. (Figured specimen in the York Museum.) = ? Ginkgo digitata (pollen-sacs of male flower).

� Small vegetable bodies in groups,� Phillips, 1829, pi. vii. fig. 25. (Figured specimen in the York Museum.) = ? small seeds.

In 1829 there also appeared an important paper by Murchison On the Coalfield of Brora, in Sutherlandshire, and some of thenbsp;stratified deposits in the North of Scotland} Murchison�s attentionnbsp;was first called to this district by Buokland amp; Lyell, who visitednbsp;Brora in 1824, and were led to express the opinion that thenbsp;Sutherlandshire Coalfield should he included in the Oolite divisionnbsp;of the Jurassic system. K�nig contributed some notes on annbsp;equisetaceous plant, which he named Oncylogonatiim carlonarium

(no doubt ideutioal �witb Equisetites columnaris, Brongn.), and on some � snbtriangular or inversely cordate carbonaceous plates,nbsp;which are probably the scales of a female Araucarian cone. Innbsp;referring to the Brora plants, Murchison makes the followingnbsp;observation: � �If the mode of distribution and the genericnbsp;characters of these fossil plants be ever reduced under generalnbsp;laws, they will no longer be regarded as anomalies, but will formnbsp;an important addition to the natural history of the beds withnbsp;which they are associated,� �

The Fossil Flora, of Great Britain, by Bindley amp; Hutton, which appeared in parts between the years 1831 and 1837,¹ ² containsnbsp;drawings and descriptive notes of several species of Jurassicnbsp;plants ; several of these were communicated by the youngernbsp;Williamson, and others by Bean, Murray, Dunn, and Phillips.nbsp;There is an interesting reference in Williamson�s autobiographynbsp;to his share in the production of the Fossil Flora. He speaksnbsp;of Mr. Dunn, Secretary to the Literary and Philosophical Societynbsp;of Scarborough, as having urged him to undertake the drawings,nbsp;which were made � at one end of Mr. Weddell�s kitchen-table,nbsp;whilst the housekeeper was occupied at the other end with thenbsp;several processes of providing the day�s dinner.� ² Williamsonnbsp;was at this time a medical student living in the house ofnbsp;Mr. Thomas Weddell, a practitioner in Scarborough.

The following list includes such plants from Yorkshire as are figured by Bindley k Hutton. I have added the modem names,nbsp;and mentioned the museums in which I have seen some of thenbsp;figured specimens. The date of publication is appended in each case.

Cydopteris Beani. PI. 44, 1832. (Type-specimen in the Scarborough Museum.) = Otozamites Beani (L. amp;, H.).

Beeopteris polypodioides. PL 60, 1832. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Laccopteris polypodioides (Bioogn.).

lycopodites falcatus. PI. 61, 1832. (Type in the British Museum, No. 39,314.) = Lycopodites falcatus.

Glossopteris Phillipsn. PI. 63, 1833, (Figured specimens in the British Museum, Nos. 39,221 and 39,222.)nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Sayenopteris Bhillipsi (Brongn.).

^ Bolton (92) does not include any of the Yorkshire Coast plants in his list of figured specimens in the Manchester Museum.

T� :�r-7 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;-r�! o ^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\ = Anomozamites Jylissom.

Meuropteris recentior. PL 68, 1833. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.).

Tlt;Bniopteris major. PL 92,1833. (Type in the Manchester Museum.) =T. major^ L. amp;H.

Fictyophyllum rugosum. PL 103, 1834. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Dictyophyllum rugosum, L. amp; H.

Neuropteris arguta. PL 105, 1834. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Coniopteris arguta (L. amp; H.).

Feeopteris insignis. PL 106, 1834. (Counterpart of type - specimen in the Leckenby Coll., Cambridge.) = Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn).

P. undans. PL 120, 1834. (Type in the Scarborough Museum.) = Clado^ phlebis denticulata (Brongn.) (fertile frond).

Pecopteris Williamsonis. PL 126, 1834. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.).

Sphenopteris Williamsonis. PI. 131, 1834. (Type in the Scarborough Museum.) = 8. Williamsoni (Brongn.).

Pecopteris whitbiensis. PL 134, 1834. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.).

Phlebopteris contigua. PL 144, 1835. (Type in the York Museum.) ^Laccopteris polypodioides (Brongn.).

Sphenopteris serrata. PL 148, 1835. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Coniopteris arguta (L. amp; H.).

Otopteris cuneata. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;PLnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;155,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1835.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(Typenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;innbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;thenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Manchesternbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Museum.)

Pecopteris acutifolia. PL 157, 1835. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Coniopteris arguta (L. amp; H.).

Thuites expansus. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;PLnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;167,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1835.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(Typenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;innbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;thenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Manchesternbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Museum.)

Sphenopteris arguta. PL 168, nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1835.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(Typenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;innbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;thenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Manchesternbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Museum.)

Pecopteris dentata. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;PLnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;169,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1835.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(Typenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;innbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;thenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Manchesternbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Museum.)

Tympanophora simplex. PL 170a, 1835. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Coniopteris hymcnophylloides

Pecopteris lobifolia. PL 179, 1836. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Cladophlebis lobifolia (PhilL).

Equisetum laterale. PL 186, 1836. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Equisetites columnaris (Brongn.).

JPecopferis haiburnensis. PI. 187, 1836. (Type in the Newcastle Museum.') = Cladophlebis haiburnensis (L. amp; H.).

Braehyphyllum mamillare. Pla. 188 and 219, 1836 and 1837. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= B. mamilUre

Zamialaneeolata. PI. 194, 1836. (Type in the Manchester Museum.) = Fodo-mmites lameolatus (L. amp; H.).

? Otopteris acuminata,^ var. brevifolia, PI. 208, 1837. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Otozamites acuminatus

? Solenites furcata. PI. 209, 1837. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Baiera Lindleyana (Schimp.).

The volume of Illustrations of Fossil Plants edited hy Professor Lebour, consisting of autotype reproductions of drawings preparednbsp;for Lindley amp; Hutton, contains two plates of Lower Oolite plants :�nbsp;Bphenopteris quinqueloba, var. arhuscula, Phill. PI. 38. = Coniopteris quinqueloba

Otryptomerites divaricatus. PI. 57. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Cryptomerites divarieatus, Bunb.

In Williamson�s papers read before the Geological Society in 1834 and 1836,� a list is given of Oolitic plants, but one of thenbsp;most important additions to the geology of the plant-bearing stratanbsp;in these contributions is the correction of Phillips� mistake as tonbsp;the horizon of the Gristhorpe plant-bed.

An important paper was read before the Geological Society of London in 1851 by Bunbury,¹ ² On some Fossil Plants from thenbsp;Jurassic Strata of the Yorkshire Coast, in which several speciesnbsp;nre critically discussed, and illustrated by accurate drawings; thenbsp;species specially referred to include the following;�

�aiera yracilis^ Bunb. ('Bype in the Bunbury Collection, Botanical Museum, Cambridge.) = Baiera gracilis.

Pecopteris exilis, Phill. [Banbury�s figured specimen is in the Botanical Museum, Cambridge; refigured, Seward (94), p. 197.]nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Kluhia exilis (Phill.).

Calamites Beani, Bunb. [Type in the Manchester Museum; figured by Gardner (86), pi. ix. fig. 2 ; vide also Seward (98), fig. 60.]nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Equisetites Beani

The two folio volumes hy Zigno entitled Flora Fomlis Formationis Oolithicm, published between 1856 and 1885,' containnbsp;numerous references to British Jurassic plants; these are quotednbsp;in the lists of synonyms of the various species dealt with in thenbsp;Catalogue.

In Hugh Miller�s Testimony of the Rocks,^ reference is made to the occurrence of several plants in the Helmsdale deposits ofnbsp;Sutherlandshire � identical with Lower Oolite species from thenbsp;Yorkshire coast. The Mesozoic flora of Scotland is in need ofnbsp;further investigation, and it is proposed to deal elsewhere with thenbsp;botany and geology of these northern species.

In 1864 Leckenby* described and figured �some new or imperfectly known species � of East Yorkshire plants ; most of thenbsp;specimens dealt with are included in the Leckenby Collection,nbsp;which Professor Adam Sedgwick purchased in 1872 for thenbsp;quot;VVoodwardian Museum, Cambridge:��

Cycaditeszamioides. Leek. (Tjpe la the Leckenby Coll., Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge.) = Taxites zamioides (Leek., ex Bean MS.).

E, medianum. Leek., ex Bean MS. 1 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�t-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/t , t, utm ,

Otopteris mediana, Leek. (Type in the Leckenby Coll.) = Otozamites Beani (L. amp; H.).

0. graphica, Leek., ex Bean MS. (Type in the Leckenby Coll.) = Otozamites graphieus (Leek., ex Bean MS.).

0. tenuata. Leek., ex Bean MS. (Type in the Leckenby Coll.) = 0. Bim-buryanus, Zign.

S. JugUri, Ett, (Type in the Leckenby Coll,) = Rufordia Ooepperti (Dunk,), Ifeuropteris arguta, L, amp; H, (Figured specimen in the Leckenby Coll,)nbsp;= Coniopteris arguta (L, amp; H,),

Recopteris polydactyla, G�pp, (Figured specimen in the Leckenby Coll,) �Matonidiim Goepperti (Ett,),

Rhlebopteris propinqua (L, amp; H,), nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Laxcopteris polypodioides (Brongn,),

Rhhhopteris Woodwardii, Leek, (Type in the Leckenby Coll,) = Laccopteris Woodwardi (Leek,),

Rucoides ereetus, Leek,, ex Bean MS, (Type in the Leckenby Coll, ; refigured, Seward (98), p, 233,)nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;= Marchantites ereetus (Leek,, ex Bean MS,),

The �writings of Morris,^ Carruthers,* Starkie Gardner,� and others contain scattered references to descriptions of Lower Oolitenbsp;plants; several species of the British Jurassic flora are dealt withnbsp;also by Saporta ^ in his Monograph on the plants of this period.

The most important of the more modern contributions to our knowledge of the Jurassic plants of England is unfortunatelynbsp;�written in the Swedish language, and is not accompanied by anynbsp;illustrations. In 1880 Nathorst� published a series of notes on hisnbsp;�visits to various English Museums, together with observationsnbsp;niade in the field at some of the principal plant localities on thenbsp;Yorkshire coast. The same author discovered a new plant-bednbsp;between White Nab and Scarborough, which enabled him to addnbsp;some new species to the Lower Oolite flora, Nathorst�s notesnbsp;have proved of considerable value in the examination of thenbsp;Yorkshire plants, and his opinions on the several species arenbsp;frequently referred to in the descriptive part of this Catalogue,nbsp;The following new species are mentioned or briefly described,nbsp;hut in some cases I have been led to identify them with speciesnbsp;previously recorded. Whether or not Nathorst�s supposed newnbsp;species should be retained, there can be no question as to thenbsp;great value of his critical notes.

Ginkgo whitUensis, n.sp. (Type in the British Museum, No. 39,331.) = Ginkgo whitbiensis^ Nath.

Among the works dealing more especially with the stratigraphy of the Lower Oolite rooks of Yorkshire, reference may he madenbsp;to the Geological Survey Memoirs by Messrs. Fox-Strangways,nbsp;Barrow,' and H. B. 'Woodward,� and to a series of valuable papersnbsp;by Hudleston,� published in the Proceedings of the Geologists�nbsp;Association, also to Etheridge�s Presidential Address of 1882.�

The second volume of the Geological Survey Memoirs on the Jurassic rocks of Britain, contains a long list of fossils bynbsp;Fox-Strangways, who acknowledges assistance in the revision ofnbsp;the plants by Clement Eeid.� As this is the most recent listnbsp;of plants hitherto published, and is largely founded on the notesnbsp;by Yathorst to which reference has already been made, I havenbsp;enumerated those species from Fox-Strangways� list which arenbsp;refen�ed to as �species now recognized,� adding in each case thenbsp;names employed in the present Catalogue. A change of nomenclature has been adopted in several instances, the reasons for thenbsp;changes being stated in the description of each species :�

S. PhUUpsii, Brongn. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;i ^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ i

ClathropUri, Whithimsi�, Brongn. MS. = D�tyophyl�mn rugosum, L, amp; H. DicUonia hymmophylloiios, Brongn. = GoniopUris hymgt;nophy�oides (iJrongn.,.nbsp;D. nephntarpa, Bunb. = C. hymenophylloiiles.

Jgt;. Nilssoni, Brongn. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/ = Dictyophyllutn rugosum (B. amp; �.).

F. denticulata, Brongn. = Gladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.)-F- exilis, Phffl. = Klukia, exilis (Pliill.).

� r:S;Sf}=

S. quinqueloba, Phill. = Coniopteris quinquelobo, (Phiil.). sodalis, Phill. =s Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn,).

T. Murrayana, Brongn. = Sphenopteris Murrayana (Brongn,). Anomozamites Lindleyanus, Schimp, = Anomozamites Rfilssoni (Phill.).nbsp;Araucaria JPhzllipsii, Carr. = AraucarUes RhiUipsi, Carr.

Brachyphyllum mamiUare, Brongn. = Brachyphyllum mavnillare, Brongn. B. seiosum, Phill. = Cheirolep�s setosus (Phill.).

Cycadites zamioidesy Leek. = Taxites zamioides (Leek., ex Bean MS.). Czelcanowshia Seeri^ Natb.

N�ssonia angustifolia, Bean MS. = Nilssonia mediana (Leek., ex Bean MS.). iV. tomptwy PMll. = JVquot;. eompta (Pbill.).

P. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;lanceolatusy L. amp; H.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;gt; = Bodozamites lanceolatus (L. amp; H.).

Btilozamites Leckenbyi, Bean, sp. = Btilozamites Zeckenbyi (Leek., ex BeanMS.). Schizolepis, sp.

Walchia Williamsonis, Brongn. = Pagiophyllum Williamsoni (Brongn.). Williamsonia gigas, L. amp; H. = Williamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.).

A glance at a geological map of England reveals the existence of a band of Jurassic rocks stretching diagonally across England fromnbsp;the coast of Yorkshire to Dorsetshire in the south-west. Betweennbsp;the Yorkshire strata and those of corresponding age in the midland

and south-west districts there is a striking difference as regards petrological characters, thickness, and fossil contents. The sedimentary rocks in the north-eastern area consist of a considerablenbsp;thickness of estuarine or freshwater deposits, with here and there

a thin marine band, whereas in the other (hstric s Oolite rocks are almost exclusively of marine origin. _nbsp;between Whitby and a few miles south of bcarboroug isnbsp;by Middle and Lower Oolite and Liassio strata ; the acoomp y ?

map shows the position of the most important localities in this part of the coast from which Lower Oolite plants have beennbsp;obtained.

The sketch-map shown in Fig. 1 is a simplified form of part of the larger map published in the volume of the International Geologicalnbsp;Congress of 1888. While illustrating the relation of the Estuarinenbsp;Series of the Inferior Oolite (Bajooian) to the Middle and Uppernbsp;Oolite and to the Cretaceous rocks, it marks the position of thenbsp;chief localities from which the fossil plants dealt with in thenbsp;following pages have been obtained.

The moorlands and bold headlands of Forth-East Yorkshire constitute an elevated region which is bounded on the west bynbsp;the low-lying Triassic plain of Central Yorkshire. Geologicallynbsp;this district is marked off from the other Jurassic areas by well-defined characters; the rocks composing it are chiefly arenaceous,nbsp;with some Oolitic limestones and ironstones and a few thin seamsnbsp;of coal. The occurrence of some subordinate marine beds affordsnbsp;evidence of the frequent oscillations of level in this part ofnbsp;England during the Jurassic period. Broadly speaking, the Eastnbsp;Yorkshire rocks of Lower Oolite age consist of three importantnbsp;Estuarine Series separated from one another by thin hands containing marine fossils. The following classification illustrates thenbsp;relative positions of these two types of sediments:�

These Lower Oolite rooks of England are correlated with part of the Middle or Brown Jura of Germany (L. von Buch and Quenstedt;nbsp;= Dogger of Oppel), and with the Bathonian and Bajocian ofnbsp;French geologists.'

The Yorkshire Dogger, exposed in the cliff sections of Blea Wyke, High Whitby, Saltwick, and elsewhere, forms the lowestnbsp;member of the Lower Oolite rocks ; it is a littoral formation.

consisting largely of rounded Mocks (tke so-called doggers) of sandstone and ironstone.

Tke Lower Estuarine Series, exposed at various localities on the coast between Eohin Hood Bay and Huntclifl (the latter is situatednbsp;a few miles further north than the coastline shown in the map),nbsp;consists of a considerable thickness of arenaceous and argillaceousnbsp;sediments, associated with beds of oolitic ironstone, thin coal-seams,nbsp;and an abundance of carbonaceous matter. This succession ofnbsp;estuarine sediments containing plant remains is capped by a thinnbsp;marine band known as the EUer Beck led. This is succeeded bynbsp;the Millepore led, so called from the occurrence of the Polyzoannbsp;^(iploceciastraminea'^ (Phill.) ( = Milleporaimd (Jricopora straminea),nbsp;�which consists of ferruginous sandstone and limestone, and isnbsp;exposed at Cloughton AVyke in its arenaceous facies, and at Gns-thorpe Bay and Cay ton Bay as a limestone. Above the Millepm'enbsp;bed we pass up into the second series of freshwater or estuarinenbsp;beds, known as the Middle Estuarine Series. These depositsnbsp;constitute the principal coal-bearing series in the Inferior Oolite,nbsp;and include the famous plant-bed of Gristhorpe Bay. Prom thenbsp;iliddle Estuarine rocks a certain amount of jet has been obtained,nbsp;but most of the well-known Whitby jet is of Upper Liassic age.

Another marine intercalation, the Scarlorough or Grey Limestone Series, rests on the Middle Estuarine beds; these blue and greynbsp;Bmestones, exposed in the cliffs at Cloughton Wyke, form the mostnbsp;important marine development in the Yorkshire Oolites. Restingnbsp;on the Scarborough limestones there is a third succession of fresh-quot;water strata, known as the Upper Estuarine Series, consisting ofnbsp;hard siliceous rocks, sandstones, shales, and ironstones, includingnbsp;much carbonaceous matter. Some species of plants have beennbsp;obtained from sandstone strata in the lower part of this thirdnbsp;Estuarine Series, which occupies nearly the whole of the moorlandsnbsp;of the East Yorkshire area.

At the summit of the Inferior Oolite we have the Cornbrash, so named hy William Smith, which is made up of calcareous bedsnbsp;containing abundant marine fossils, and is exposed in the Cartonnbsp;and Gristhorpe Bay sections.

The conditions under which the estuarine sediments of the Yorkshire area were laid down are briefly dealt with in the concluding pages of the Catalogue. As the present volume deals onlynbsp;with the Inferior Oolite plants of East Yorkshire, the considerationnbsp;of the Stonesfleld flora and of other Oolitic plants recorded fromnbsp;various British localities is reserved for the second volume of thenbsp;Jurassic Plora Catalogue.

The following incomplete account of extra-British Jurassic planthearing strata is intended to draw attention to the principal floras, which present a more or less close resemblance to that facies ofnbsp;Jurassic vegetation represented by the plants from the Yorkshirenbsp;coast. In the following lists of plants the right-hand column isnbsp;intended to illustrate the resemblance or possible identity of Britishnbsp;species with species described from other countries ; a more detailednbsp;comparison may be found in the descriptive part of the Catalogue.

One of the earliest notices of French Jurassic plants occurs in a memoir by Desnoyers ^ on the Oolite rocks of Mamers in thenbsp;department of Sarthe in the north-west of France, containing a fewnbsp;notes by Brongniart on some species of fossil plants.

Some years later Pomel ^ published a series of notes on Jurassic plants from several localities and horizons, and proposed a largenbsp;number of new generic names, most of which have not been retained.nbsp;A small number of species is enumerated also by Brongniart innbsp;his Prodrome^ of 1828, and in the Tableau'^' published in 1849;nbsp;but it is in the well-known volumes by Saporta� that we find

the fullest account of the Jurassic plants of France. Some of the figures in Saporta�s monograph are reproduced from drawingsnbsp;originally prepared for Brongniart, and these enable us to recognizenbsp;certain species which are mentioned hut not described in thenbsp;Prodrome and the Tablem. Several of the specimens figured innbsp;Saporta�s volumes are in the Museum of Natural History andnbsp;in the School of Mines, Paris; an examination of some of thenbsp;type-specimens impressed upon me the need of considerable cautionnbsp;in drawing conclusions from the figures alone, many of which arenbsp;far from accurate. In the following list only such plants arenbsp;included as present a close resemblance to East Yorkshire species,nbsp;or agree approximately in age with the British species. Severalnbsp;species of Sphenopteris, Sehropteris, Cladophleiis, and other fernsnbsp;have been omitted, as they are often founded on fragmentarynbsp;and insufficient material. Most of the strata from which thenbsp;Jurassic plants of France have been obtained are of marine origin.nbsp;Among the most important localities from the point of view of anbsp;comparison of the French and English species are Mamersnbsp;(Bathonian), H�Etrochey (Cornhrash), and Chateauroux (Corallian),nbsp;in the departments of Sarthe, Cote d�Or, and Indre respectively.nbsp;The numerous fossils referred by Saporta to Algse need not benbsp;considered; they have no representatives in the Yorkshire beds,nbsp;and most of them have in all probability no claim to be includednbsp;in the plant kingdom.

Equisetum Emalii, Sap., p. 248, pi. 30, figs. 1-4 (Batbonian) , cf. Equisetite eolumnaris, Brongn.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ n � t

Zomatopteris MorUiana, Sap., p. 396, pi. 51, figs. 4-6, P * nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;� � Aar n

Brongn., p. 444, pi. 64, figs. 1-5 (Khcetic), nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;*nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. u a a.

J. maUformis (Pom.), p. 468, pl. 67, fig. 4 (Corallian) 1 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;LmMegana.

Zamites Moremi, Sap., ex Brongn. MS., p. 92, pl. 84, figs. 1-3, and pl. 85, pp. 1 and 2 (Corallian); cf. Williamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.) and Otozamitesnbsp;acuminatus (L. amp; H.).

Z. acerosus, Sap., p. 97, pl. 86 (Corallian); cf. Otozamites acuminatus (L. amp; H.).

Z. Feneonis, Brongn., p. 99, pis. 87-92 (Corallian and Kimeridgian) ; = (pars) Williamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.).

Z. Olarmallensis, Sap., p. 108, pl. 93, fig. 1 (Kimeridgian); cf. Williamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.).

Z. distractus. Sap., p. 116, pl. 93, pp. 4 and � (Kimeridgian) ; cf. Otozamites acuminatus (L. amp; H.).

Otozamites recurrens, Sap., p. 146, pl. 101, figs. 2, nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;3 (Batlionian) ;

O. graphicus (Leek.), p. 153, pl. 102, pp. 2, 3 (Bathonian); �O.graphieus (Leek.).

O. pterophylloides, Schimp., ex Brongn. MS., p. 157, pis. 104-108 (Bathonian); cf. O. obtusus, Tar. oo�ticus.

O. marginatus, Sap., p. 168, pl. 109, fig. 1 (?Bathonian); =: Otozamites Beani (L. amp; H.).

O. decorus, Sap., p. 177, pis. 110, 111 (Cornbrash) ; cf. O. acuminatus (L. amp; H.).

Sphenozamites Brongniartii, Sap., p. 186, pl. 112, figs. 2-4 (Bathonian); cf. Seivardia armata (Sap.).�

S. Rossii, Zign., p. 191, pl. 114, figs. 1, 2 (Kimmeridgiau); cf. Otozamites Beani (L. amp; H.).

Triehopitys laciniata, Sap., p. 266, pl. 155, figs. 3-9 (Corallian) ; cf. Baiera Lindleyana.

Baiera longifoUa (Pom.), p. 279, pl. 159, figs. 1, 2 (Corallian); of. B. gracilis, Bunb.

Brachyphyllum Besnoyersii (Brongn.), p. 331, pis. 163, 164 (Cornbrash); cf. Braehyphyllum mam�lare, Brongn.

^rachyphyllum mrearnnurn, Brongn., p. 311, pis. 165-168 (Coralliaa) ; cf. a. mamillare.

-B- Jauherti, Sap., p. 349, pi. 165, figs. 1-1 (Corallian) ; cf. B. mamillare. ^laehyphyllum rigidum (Pom.), p. 391, pis. 177-179 (Coralhan); cf. Pagio-phyllum Williamsoni (Brongn.).nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,

�^rauearites Moreauana (Pom.), p- 425, pls- 184, 183 (CoraUian); cf. Arauearites Bhillipsi, Carr.

OtozamiUe Bmburyanm, Zign., p. 460, pi- 298, fig. 1 (Bathonian); = Otozamttes ^unburyanm, Zign.

A few species of Inferior Oolite plants have heen recorded hy Riche amp; Bleicheri from strata in the neighbourhood of Nancy,nbsp;hut the fragments figured are too small to admit of accurate

A-dditions have heen made to the plants from Ereneh Jurassic strata by Cri�, who records some new species from Mamers andnbsp;other localities. This author has also published brief notes on thenbsp;comparison of Frenoh Jurassic plants with species from England,nbsp;Portugal, and the Southern Hemisphere.^ A fern described hynbsp;Zeiller as AcrosticMdes rhombifoUus, var. rarinervis, Font., fromnbsp;the Gres bigarr� of Saint-Germain hears a close resemblance tonbsp;Todites Williamsoni from the English Golitic rocks.�

GEHMANY,

The chief developments of Jurassic rocks in Germany are referred hy Kayser ¹ ² to three principal areas :

I. Franko-SwaMan area., forming a large curve, � one arm of which extends with a south-easterly strike from the regionnbsp;of Coburg to Hegenshurg, whilst the other stretches thencenbsp;in a south-westerly direction to the foot of the Blacknbsp;Forest.� The passage-beds between the Keuper and

Liassic rocks of tke north arm of this area hare afforded a particularly rich flora, -which has heen described innbsp;detail by Schenk ^; this flora is referred to later.

the Teutoberger Wald. Several Wealden species have been described from this region.�¹

Kurr� has described a few species of plants from the S-wabian Jura, which suggest a Liassio horizon; a few of these may benbsp;compared with East Yorkshire species:

From the Solenhofen beds in Franconia,^ which are classed with the Upper or White Jura, several plants have been recorded,nbsp;especially species of conifers.

The fossil flora of Bamberg, Bayreuth, and other localities in the Franconian area is one of the richest in Europe. Plants from thesenbsp;localities have been described by Sternberg, G�ppert, Braun, andnbsp;others, but it is to Schenk � that we owe the most complete accountnbsp;of this Khsetic-Lias flora. Attention has been called by Braun,�nbsp;and more recently by Nathorst, to the close agreement or evennbsp;identity of many of the Franconian plants with species of Lowernbsp;Oolite age from East Yorkshire. The following list includes suchnbsp;species as illustrate most clearly the marked Lower Oolitic faciesnbsp;of the Keuper and Lias flora.

Jiaiera treniata, Braun ; cf. Baiera Fhillipsi, Nath. (Some of the examples of B. tceniata figured by Schenk are identical with Yorkshire specimens; e.g.,nbsp;cf. pi. ix. fig. 4 of the present volume, and Schenk�s pi. v. fig. 2.)nbsp;JempauUa Muensteriana (Presl) ; cf. Baiera gracilis, Bunb. (cf. pi. ix. fig. 3, andnbsp;Schenk, pi. ix. figs. 7 and 10).

^enopteris rhoifoUa, Yresl; cf. Sapenopteris Fhillipsi (Broagn.). (Cf. Text-figs. 24-26, and Schenk, pi. x�. fig. 1; also pi. XY�i. fig. 2, and Schenk, pi. xui.nbsp;fig. 4.)

Fhlebopt-eris ajfinis, Schenk ; cf. Laccopieris polypodioides (Brongn.). 'Fhauynatopteris M�nsterij Gopp. )

Nilssonia polymorpha, Schenk ; cf. Nilssonia compta (Phill.). (Cf. pi. ix. fig. 5;

^ierophyllum Carnallianum, Gopp. ) , -� -j P-liraunianum,G�p^.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\lt;ci. Deoomtes.

Jurassic plants are poorly represented m the Austrian The well-known floras of Lunz in Lower Austria and anbsp;Carinthia belong to an earlier epoch, and present but ew ponbsp;contact with the Lower Oolite flora of England. ,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;� tt

From Steierdorf in Banat in the south-eastern par o u , Ettingshausen * described a few plants in 1852, but tnbsp;been more fully dealt with by Andrae,^ who recognized nine specienbsp;as identical with Lower Oolite types from the Yorkshire coasnbsp;a few only of Andrae�s plants are figured it is impossible 1quot;�nbsp;any opinion as to the identity of some of the species wi onbsp;Oolite types.

Alethoptet'is I^Mllipsii (Brojifm.) ) o/v? j Z7 i- ^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;7 , /-nnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\

,T f. ^ ^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^ ^ ClmopAleois aentteulata (Bron^n.).

A. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(L, amp;II.)nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;I � /

Tolypodites crenifoliiis (Phill.) �=z Xaccopteris polypodioides (Brongn.). CamptopUris Nilssoni (Brongn.); cf. Bictyophyllmn rugosum^ L. amp; H.

Feeopteris Murrayana, Brongn. = ? Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.). Andriania baruthina^ Braun ; cf. Laccopteris polypodioides (Brongn.).nbsp;Tmniopteris vittata, Brongn.

In. 1888 Stur�� described several species of Jurassic plants from Grojec in Galicia, and more recently Eaciborski � has published annbsp;important memoir on the fossil flora of the Cracow district obtainednbsp;from the mines of Grojec and other localities. Many of Eaoiborski�snbsp;species are undoubtedly identical with East Yorkshire plants; andnbsp;the flora as a whole presents a closer agreement with that of thenbsp;Inferior Oolite than with any other period. Eaciborski recognizesnbsp;the correspondence between the Cracow plants and those from thenbsp;Yorkshire coast, but from the presence of Thinnfeldia and somenbsp;other Ehffitio types he concludes that the flora he describes isnbsp;slightly older than the English flora.

The following list, which does not include all the species, illustrates the striking Lower Oolite facies of the Cracow flora:�

T. princeps (Presl). (Eaciborski�a figures do not afford satisfactory evidence of the occurrence of this species.)

Thyrsopteris ? Murrayana (Brongn.) = Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.). Laccopteris PhiUipsii, Zign. = ? Matonidimn Goepperti (Ett.).

Xicrodietyon TFoodwardii (Leek.) = Laccopteris Woodtvardi (Leek.). Symenophyllites? ZeiUeri, Rac.; cf. Buffordia Goepperti (Dunk.).

CladophleUs whitbiensis, Biongn.) quot;I nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;WiUiamslt;^ni (Brongn.).

C. insignis (L. amp; H.) = CladophUbis dentieulata (Bro o Pecopter� decurrens (Andrae) ; cf. Coniopteris argu a.

1885.^ In a preliminary paper publis e m � ��red Lower attention to the close similarity of the recen y is

East Yorkshire. Among the Italian pUn -hv British Inferior mentioned as nearly allied to or identica winbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;genus

Oehte apeeies ; the Te.etian Sera � ri² m Cjcade. the pen. Otommites being especially well represented.

of the Tympanophora racemosa type (Comoptens ynief p Eichopteris Fisianica, Zign. ; cf. Fdchyptetii^ lanceo ata.

SS�,ri� Yra.,=�(B'to-) (��

Fhlebopferis polypodioides ) t ^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;? t -j /t�nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\

Sagenopteris cuneata^ L. amp;H. =1: Sagenopteris Zhillipsi (Brongn.), var. cuneata. S. ren�formiSy Zign.; cf. S. PhiUipsiy var. cuneata,

Danaeites Heeriiy Zign.; cf. large examples of Nihsonia eompta (Phill.). Zamites ZotzoanuSy Zign.; cf. H'^illiatnsonia pecten (Th.i\\.).

O. Canossce, Zign. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;}nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. /x r. x-r ^

The species �which Heer refers to a Jurassic horizon in his Flora Fossilis Hehetim � are fe-w in number, and in several instances toonbsp;fragmentary to admit of determination. The numerous specimensnbsp;classed among the Alg� are practically valueless lor our presentnbsp;purpose.

Most of the Mesozoic plants recorded from Portugal may be identified or compared -with Wealden species, or -with plants fromnbsp;higher horizons in the Cretaceous system. Both Heer^ and

Saporta' have described several species of plants from strata of Jurassic age, some of which are probably identical with Englishnbsp;species. Several of the � species � founded by Saporta on extremelynbsp;small fragments possess but little value as definite specific types,nbsp;and it is impossible to form any accurate estimate of the number ofnbsp;East Yorkshire types which may be represented in the Portuguesenbsp;flora of Jurassic age.

Equisetum lusitanicum, Heer, figured by Heer and Saporta, may fle identical with Equisetites columna/ris, and Otozamites angusti-foliuB, Heer, agrees fairly closely with some of the English examplesnbsp;of ^illiamsonia pecten (Phill.); among the fragments referred bynbsp;Saporta to Sphenopteris there are some which recall Coniopterunbsp;^ynenophylloides and C. quinqueloba; but it is useless to attemptnbsp;fo flase any detailed comparisons on such imperfect data.

The Ehffitic flora of Scania, in Southern Sweden, contains several species which are closely allied to Lower Oolite types. Nathorst�snbsp;ttieinoirs on the plants from Palsj�, Bjuf, Helsingborg, and othernbsp;localities in Scania, are among the most important contributionsnbsp;to our knowledge of Lower Mesozoic floras, and they enable usnbsp;to obtain a fairly comprehensive view of the characteristics ofnbsp;Ehaetic vegetation. Nathorst has himself drawn attention to thenbsp;Numerous points of contact between the Ehaetic flora of Swedennbsp;^ud the later flora of East Yorkshire.� The following list includesnbsp;�uch species from Hathorst�s lists as best illustrate the existencenbsp;a Lower Oolite facies in the Swedish flora ; for furthernbsp;information regarding the Scanian plants reference must be madenbsp;to Yathorst�s memoirs, from which the following species have been

^^tizomopteris Schenki, Nath. Not represented in the British flora, hut worthy of note aa possibly the rhizome of Dictyophyllmn.

C. Seen, Nath. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/ cf.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ckulophlebu ckntimlata (Brongn.).

Baiera Geinitzi, Nath.; cf. Ginlcgo digitata (Brongn.) and G. whitbiensis, Nath. Falissya Braunii, Endl.; cf. Taxites zamioides (Leek.).

Lepidopteris Ottonis (G�pp.) {~Asplenites Otlonis, Schenk); cf. Cladophlehis denticulata (fertile pinna).

Ctenisfallax, Nath. {= Anthrophyopsis Nihsoni, Nath.); cf. Ctenis, sp. Fiilozamites NiUsoni, Nath.; cf- Ftilozamites Leckenbyi.

Acrostichites Goeppertiamts (Miinst.) ; cf. Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.). Tmniopteris ohtusa, Nath.

Some of the Rhstio plants from Scania comparable with Jurassic species are figured by Nathorstin his Geology of Sweden}

Jurassic plants from Bornholm have long been known through the description of a few species by Pingel, Brongniart, Forchhammer,nbsp;and Nathorst, hut it is only recently that any complete account ofnbsp;the fossil flora of this island has been attempted. Bartholin�snbsp;investigations clearly demonstrate the occurrence of severalnbsp;Inferior Oolite species in the Bornholm fossil flora; he concludesnbsp;that rather less than half of the species are identical with or closelynbsp;allied to Ehajtic plants, while about one-third agree with Inferiornbsp;Oolite types. The species enumerated below afford strong evidencenbsp;in favour of the existence of a well-marked Oolitic facies in thenbsp;Bornholm flora; in fact, I am disposed to consider that the Inferiornbsp;Oolite types predominate over the Rhsetic and Wealden species.nbsp;Sagenopteris PhUlipsii (Brongn.) = S. Phillipsi.

Dicksonia Pingelii (Brongn.) ; cf. (pars) Ooniopieris hymmopkylloides (Brongn.). Asplenium Boesserti (Presl); cf. Cladophlehis denticulata (Brongn.).

T(^niopteris tenuinervis, Braun; c�. T. 'oittata, Brongn. /-r nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^

Microdictyon Woodwardianum, Sap. = Laecopteiis Woo^ d) 'gt;ctyopkyUum Missoni (Biongn.) = ? i). rugosum (L.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�)�

Milssonia polymorpha, Sdienk (pars) = ? iV. tenuine'i vis, a Otozamites ohtusus (L. amp; H.).

CzekanowsUa rigida, Heer ; cf. Baiera Lindleyana (Schimp.). PiigiophyUum faloatum, Barth.; c�. P. Williamsoni (Brongn.).

Bartholm' has recently figured and described some plant fragments found in an eiTatic block of ferruginous sandstone fromnbsp;the glacial deposits near Copenhagen. The specimens are for thenbsp;most part very imperfect, and their determination is a matter ofnbsp;some uncertainty, hut one or two of the species are representednbsp;lgt;y more satisfactory examples;�

A few plants which suggest the same geological horizon as that of the Cape Boheman beds have been described also from Sassen Bay ;nbsp;the specimens referred by iSTathorst to Nihsonia cf. orientalis, Heer,nbsp;may be compared with the English species N. tenuinervis, Hath.

The Mesozoic plants obtained from Advent Bay and Cape Staratschin in Spitzbergen belong to a somewhat higher horizon,nbsp;and bear a close resemblance to Wealden types; they are probablynbsp;of uppermost Jurassic age.'

In a paper published in 1890 Schenk¹ ² describes a species of Araucarioxylon and two species of Cedroxylon from the plant-bedsnbsp;of Green Harbour ; the specimens were originally described bynbsp;Cramer under the generic name Finites?

Among the Mesozoic floras of the far Horth the most important, from the point of view of the distribution of Lower Oolite species,nbsp;is that which Heer has described from material collected bynbsp;Czekanowski, Hartung, and others. The principal localities atnbsp;which these Jurassic plants were discovered are Ust-Balei, innbsp;latitude 51� H., about forty miles north of Irkutsk, the Uppernbsp;Amoor Biver, the Lena district, and elsewhere.²

Asplenium whitlieme (Brongn.) = Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.) and (pars) ? CladophUbis denticulata (Brongn.).

A. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Petruschineme, Heernbsp;Phylhtheca Sibirica, Heer; cf. Equisetites columnaris, Brongn.

Several forms of Ginkgo leaves, including numerous examples of G. digitata referred

Gzekanowskia rigida, Heer) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\ ^ ,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;, � ttnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/t c tt %

� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;TTnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;( = (pars) Vzekanowshia Murrayana (L. amp; H.).

C. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;setacea, Heernbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;!nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;vnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/

In 1879 and 1881 Schmalhausen' published a memoir on the Jura-Flora of Eussia, in which he described plants from the coal-basin of Kusnezk in the Altai Mountains, in West Siberia, fromnbsp;the valley of the Petschora Eiver in Worth-East European Eussia,nbsp;and from the lower Tunguska Eiver in Worthern Siberia. Eromnbsp;these regions he recorded certain species of plants indicative ofnbsp;a Jurassic age, such as Ginhgo digitata, G%ekanowskia rigida,nbsp;Thyrsopteris prisca. Heer, and other ferns. It is, however, verynbsp;probable, as Zeiller^ has shown, that these plant-beds should benbsp;referred to a Permian horizon. The reasons for this conclusionnbsp;and the correctness of Schmalhansen�s determinations are discussednbsp;at length in Zeiller�s paper.

Eiehwald� has recorded a few Jurassic plants from Kamenka and other localities in Southern Eussia:�

Erom Disco Island and from Kome on the north-west coast of Greenland, Heer ¹ ² has described numerous species, which indicate

on the whole a Cretaceous rather than a Jurassic flora; some types, however, are identical with or closely allied to East Yorkshirenbsp;species.

In 1896 Dr. Hartz,' of Copenhagen, published a description of eighteen species of fossil plants from Cape Stewart on the eastnbsp;coast of Greenland; he considers the flora to he of Ehsetic ornbsp;Ehsetic-Lias age, hut he expresses his opinion cautiously, andnbsp;points out that the evidence is hardly sufficient to admit ofnbsp;accurate determination of the geological horizon. Some of Hartz�nbsp;plants are no doubt identical with Inferior Oolite species.

Todea WilUamsonis (Brongn.) = Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.). iPterophg�um subaiquale, THaitz ; cf. Williamsonia peeten {quot;PhiM.).

I'odozamites lanceolatus (L. amp; H.) I _ jp lanceolatus F. Schenkii, Hartznbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�

Czekanowskia rigida. Heer) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;� , t -nrnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^T r tt \

� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;gt; = Czekanowskia murrayana (L. amp; H.).

A few somewhat fragmentary plants have been collected by Nansen¹ ² and by the members of the Jackson - Harmsworthnbsp;expedition² on the north side of Cape Flora, which suggestnbsp;a comparison with members of the Inferior Oolite flora of England;nbsp;but the specimens are hardly numerous enough and sufficientlynbsp;well preserved to afford certain evidence of geological age.

The plants obtained by Nansen were examined by Nathorst,^ and compared by him with the Epper Jurassic flora of Spitzbergen.nbsp;Among the specimens mentioned by Nathorst the most interestingnbsp;is a leaf of Oinkgo, very similar to some of the smaller examples

of Q. iigitata (Brongn.), from the Yorkshire coast, which is referred to a new species, G. polwris, Nath.; this might perhapsnbsp;he designated G. digitata, var. polaris. Some of the Jaokson-Harmsworth plants have been figured in a recent paper bynbsp;Yewton amp; Tealld The specimens described by the latter authorsnbsp;are referred to the genera Ginkgo, Thyrsopteris, Baiera ?, Fieldenia ?,nbsp;Podozamites ?; but the material is insufficient to enable us to donbsp;more than express the opinion that the Cape Flora beds may benbsp;best compared with Oolitic or quot;Wealden strata of other regions.

Messrs. Newton amp; Teall have also described some plant remains from Cape Stephen, about twenty miles west of Cape Flora, whichnbsp;they compare with Schmalhausen�s species from Petschora andnbsp;Tunguska. It is very probable that these Franz Josef plants may,nbsp;like Schmalhausen�s, be referred to a Permian horizon.

Fontaine�s monograph on the older Mesozoic flora of Virginia contains several illustrations which forcibly recall Lower Oolitenbsp;plants. It is to be regretted that the drawings of the fossils havenbsp;not been executed in more detail; they are often too sketchy,nbsp;and presumably somewhat inaccurate, to enable one to feel muchnbsp;confidence in the nature of the plants represented. Fontaine thusnbsp;concludes the discussion on the age and affinities of the flora:�nbsp;�European authors, and especially Sohimper, often call attention tonbsp;the strong resemblance between the Rhsetic and Lower Jurassicnbsp;floras, the likeness to the Lower Oolite of England being especiallynbsp;striking. In accordance with this fact, the presence of a markednbsp;Jurassic element in the flora of these Mesozoic beds, both innbsp;Carolina and Virginia, is of itself an evidence that they cannotnbsp;be older than Rh�tic. We are, then, I think, entitled to considernbsp;that the older Mesozoic flora of North Carolina and Virginia isnbsp;most probably Rhietio in age, and certainly not older.� ^

Stur � has pointed out the close similarity between the Lunz flora ot Austria and the Rhaetic flora of Virginia. Perhaps the mostnbsp;striking example of a type identical with, or at least very nearlynbsp;allied to, a Lower Oolite species is afforded by some fronds referrednbsp;by Fontaine to the genus Acrostiehites. In his description ofnbsp;plants from Virginia, Bunhury ^ expressed the view that as regardsnbsp;the evidence afforded by the fossil plants the strata might benbsp;referred with almost equal plausibility to either the Triassio ornbsp;Jurassic series.

Equisetites Bogersi, Schimp, (considered by Rogers identical with E. columnaris from Brora in Sutherlandshire ; of. Equisetites columnaris, Brongn.nbsp;Macrotceniopteris magnifolia, Eog.; cf. Tceniopteris major, L. amp; H.

A. ihomhifoliuSf^ani,. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Inbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.).

Asterocarpus virginiensis. Font, (fertile fragment); cf. Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.).

The numerous plants described by Fontaine in a later monograph on the Potomac or younger Mesozoic flora � consist for the mostnbsp;part of Wealden and other Lower Cretaceous species, hut Jurassicnbsp;forms are also represented.� The � Potomac flora � of Virginianbsp;and Maryland is in reality made up of floras varying in age fromnbsp;Upper Jurassic to the upper members of the Lower Cretaceous,nbsp;and does not represent a single flora marking one definite geologicalnbsp;horizon. It is unnecessary to attempt a detailed analysis of thenbsp;species described by Fontaine. Several of the plants agree withnbsp;European quot;Wealden types, others point to a higher horizon, andnbsp;there are a certain number which may he compared with Lowernbsp;Oolite species. It is very difficult to institute any exact comparisonnbsp;between the Virginian and the East Yorkshire plants withoutnbsp;access to the specimens themselves ; the illustrations in Fontaine�snbsp;monograph hardly do justice to the rich material, and the excessive

The two species CladophUbis dentioulata (Brongn.) and Todites WiUiamsoninbsp;(Brongn.) are, I believe, representednbsp;among the Potomac ferns,nbsp;cf. Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.)nbsp;(fertile pinnae). This species is probablynbsp;represented by some of the fronds referrednbsp;by Fontaine, on insufficient evidence, tonbsp;Thyrsoptamp;i'is,

Ctenopteris insignis, Font. ; cf. Ptilozamites, dPageiopsis miei'ophylla; cf. iVl anglica.

Cephalotaxopsis (several species); cf. Taxites zamioides (Leek., e.v Bean MS.). Williamsonia virginiensis^ Font.; cf. WilUamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.).

In 1896 Fontaine' published a list of fossil plants from California which he identified as probably Lower Oolite species; these include species of the genera CladopMehis and TJiyrsopteris, alsonbsp;? Sagenopteris rJioifolia, Pachgphyllum Williamsonis, Podozamitesnbsp;lanceolatus, species of Ctenophyllum and Ctenis.

One or two species, comparable with Lower Oolite forms, have also been described by Newberry^ from Triassio rooks of Hewnbsp;Jersey and the Connecticut Talley.

The plant-bearing strata of Canada have afforded but few species which may be considered identical with European Jurassic foiuns ;nbsp;but some of the plants obtained from the strata in the Kockynbsp;Mountains, named by Dr. G. M. Dawson the Kootanie Series,nbsp;appear to be very closely allied to Lower Oolite species. Sirnbsp;William Dawson has drawn attention to the presence of certainnbsp;types in the Kootanie flora, which recall species described by Heernbsp;from Jurassic rocks of Siberia.�

Salishuria sibirica, Heer | cf. Ginkgo digitata (Brongn.) and Baiera Fhillipsi, 8. lepida, Heernbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/ Hath.

Several species of plants have been described by G�ppert, Eichwald, Schenk, and Krasser from various localities in Persia; the flora isnbsp;considered by Schenk to point to a Ehsetio age ; ¹ ² but the generalnbsp;facies of the vegetation bears a distinct resemblance to the Lowernbsp;Oolite ^ flora of East Yorkshire. It is not an easy matter to decidenbsp;between a Ehastic and Inferior Oolite age when we have but a fewnbsp;fossil plant species as evidence; the close agreement between manynbsp;of the elements of these two floras renders their separation a matternbsp;of difficulty when the material is not very abundant. Whether ornbsp;not the Persian plant-beds belong to a Khsetie horizon, there are atnbsp;least certain species in close agreement with Lower Oolite types.

Asplenimn Roesserti ; cf. Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.). There is an especially close resemblance between some of the large pinnules figured bynbsp;Schenk and those of similar form from East Yorkshire.

Bictyophyllum aeutilobum, Schenk; cf. Bictyophyllmn rugosum, L. amp; H. Oleandridium tenuinene; cf. Taniopteris vittata, Brongn.

Nilssonia polymorphai , �-i nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;�nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\

Ginkgo Mttensteriana �, cf. Baiera gracilis, Bunb., and B. Bhillipsi, Nath. Acrostichites Williamsonis^ = Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.).

Among the Ehsetic plants described from South America by Szajnocha² (Argentine Eepublic) and by Zeiller^ and Solms-Laubaoh� (Chili), there are some species comparable with British

Lower Oolite types; these are referred to later under the genera Baiera and Podozamites.

Among the Mesozoic plants recorded from China there are some species which appear to be identical with Lower Oolite forms.nbsp;Our knowledge of the fossil flora of China is based chiefly on thenbsp;work of Newberry/ Brongniart/ and Schenk.�

Sphenopteris m ientalis, Nwb. I = ? Cmiopteris kytnenophylhides (Brongn.). Symenophylhtes tenellus, jSfewb. )nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;^nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;� anbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;\ a /

jlsplenium argutulum, Heer ; cf. Oladophlehis denticulate (Brongn.). Czekanoteskia rigida, Heer. (Fragments too small to determine.)

Ficksonia coriacea, Schenk; cf. Coniopteris hymenophylloides Baiera angustiloha, Heer; cf. Baiera gracilis, Bunb.

Lycopodites kFilliamsoni = ? Fagiophyllum Williamsoni (Brongn.). A.nomozamites L�czyi, Schenk ; cf. A.nomozamites Wilssoni, Schimp.nbsp;Fictyophyllum acutilobim,; ¹ ² cf. F. rugosum, L. amp; H.

Geyler/ Nathorst/ and Yokoyama' have described several species of Mesozoic plants from Japan, some of which appear tonbsp;he of Wealden age,� while others from Central Japan indicate annbsp;Inferior Oolite flora similar to that of East Yorkshire.

Ficksonia nephrocarpa, Bunb. (small fragments) = ? Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.).

Fecopteris exilis, Phill. ; cf. Coniopteris arguta (L. amp; H.) and Klukia exilis (Phffl.).9

Asplenium whitbieme (Brongn.) | cladophUbis dentieulata (Brongn.).

nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Vide Schenk (85), p. 165 ; determined by M. Zeiller.nbsp;� Geyler (77).

Podozamites laneeolatus (L. amp; H.) = ? Podozamites laneeolatus (L. amp; H.)-Pfilssonia nipponensis, Yok.; cf. N. compta (Phill.).

INDIA.

It has long been recognized that some of the Upper Gondwana floras of India present several features in common with Europeannbsp;Jurassic floras. Eeistmantel and others have identified variousnbsp;plants of the Each and other Indian floras with Lower Oolitenbsp;species from East Yorkshire, hut it is very probable that thenbsp;correspondence between these widely separated floras has beennbsp;rather underestimated than exaggerated. Eossil plants of thenbsp;Each (Umia) flora were first described by Morris' in Captain Grant�snbsp;Geology of Cutch, published in 1840, and in more recent yearsnbsp;numerous species have been described by EeistmanteP andnbsp;others.^ The Jabalpur flora, so called from the town of Jabalpur,nbsp;also contains several elements of a marked Lower Oolite facies.nbsp;Both the Jabalpur and the Umia floras appear to be approximatelynbsp;of the same age; in the recent edition of the Geology of India �nbsp;the latter is compared with the Middle and the former with thenbsp;Upper Oolite. Several species of the Eajmahal flora also bearnbsp;a striking resemblance to East Yorkshire types; this flora hasnbsp;been referred to the Liassic period.

In the following list are included such species as appear to be identical with or at least closely allied to British Inferior Oolitenbsp;types; a more detailed comparison is made in several instancesnbsp;in the descriptive part of the Catalogue :�

Macrotceniopteris omta, Schimp. ( = Taniopteris ovalis, Jj. amp; H., as identified by Oldham amp; Morris) = ? Taniopteris major, L. amp; H.'

Pterophyllum princeps, O. amp; M. ; cf. the larger forms of Nihsonia eompta (Phill.).

Becopteris indica, O. amp; M. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;| Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.).

Sphenopteris Bunburyanus^ O. amp;M.; cf. Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.). Alethopteris lobifolia (Phill.) = ? Cladophlebis lobifolia.

Araucarites (?) gracilis, O. amp; M.; cf. Lycopodites falcatus, L. amp; H. Pterophyllum Footeanum, Feist.

Fchinostrobus (Thuytes) expansus (Sternb.) ) = ? Brackyphyllum mamillare, Brachyphyllum mamillare, Brongn.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;i Brongn.

AUSTRALIA.

A valuable summary and critical review of tbe � Fossil Flora of Australia,� by Dr. Feistmantel, was published in 1890 by thenbsp;Department of Mines, New South Wales.^ This work, which wasnbsp;based on a memoir previously published in the Palcbontographioanbsp;(1878-79), contains a comprehensive historical sketch of palseo-botanioal literature relating to Australia, and a revised list ofnbsp;fossil plants from various geological horizons.

' Identified by Schenk (83), p. 253, as Asplenium whitbiense. ^ Feistmantel (90).

In the following list a few species are enumerated for comparison with British Lower Oolite formsd

AletTiopteris australis, Morr. (Victoria, New South quot;Wales, Queensland, and Tasmania); cf. Cladophleiis denticulata (Brongn.).

Bquisetum rotiferum, Ten.-Woods; of. Equisetites columnaris, Brongn. (smaller form).

Ptilophyllum oligoneiirum, Ten.-Woods; cf. Williamsoniapecten Otozamites Mandelslohiy Kurr.

Since the publication of Feistmantel�s work several species of Queensland plants have been recorded by Jack amp; Etheridge �nbsp;in their Geology of Queensland and New Guinea. More recentlynbsp;specimens have been collected by the staff of the Geologicalnbsp;Survey, and some of these are described by Shirley^ in a papernbsp;contained in Bulletin Ho. 7 of the Queensland Geological Survey.nbsp;Some of the species of Ginkgo and Baiera instituted by this authornbsp;are founded on imperfect specimens hardly worthy of being raisednbsp;to the rank of type-specimens. Among the leaves referred tonbsp;these two genera there are some examples which bear a fairlynbsp;close resemblance to Baiera gracilis, Bunb., e.g. Ginkgo bidensnbsp;(Ten.-Woods) and Baiera ipsviciensis, Shir. A fragment namednbsp;Bictyophyllum Bremerense may be compared with D. rugosum,nbsp;L. amp; H., and a leaf figured as Sagenopteris rhoifoUa recallsnbsp;8. PhilUpsi (Brongn.). The specimens described as Beanianbsp;geminata afford little or no evidence of generic identity withnbsp;Carruthers� genus. Some of the fossils figured by these authorsnbsp;are referred to in the descriptive part of the Catalogue.

� For figures, vide Feistmautel (90), McCoy (47) (74), Tenison-Woods (83). 2 Etheridge (88).

DESCRIPTION OE SPECIMENS.

In tlie descriptive part of this Catalogue the species are grouped, as far as possible, in accordance with their natural affinities. Somenbsp;of the genera are discussed at length, but in the majority of casesnbsp;reference must be made to the two volumes on the Wealden Flora ^nbsp;for an account of the history and application of generic names, asnbsp;also for definitions of Families and Classes. Several of the specimensnbsp;are from the collection of William Bean, and these usually bearnbsp;a label with his determination. Bean�s names are often quoted innbsp;the description of the specimens as occasionally throwing lightnbsp;on the current use in his day of various specific names ; but, onnbsp;the other hand, it is necessary to exercise considerable caution innbsp;attaching importance to the determinations of this enthusiasticnbsp;collector. The localities are, in many cases, too vague to serve asnbsp;guides to the exact horizon from which the plants were obtained;nbsp;we frequently find nothing more than �near Scarborough,� �nearnbsp;Whitby,� �Scarborough,� etc., indicating that, as a rule, thenbsp;necessity of giving accurate information as to the position of thenbsp;beds had not been realized.

In several instances the difficulty of determination has been considerable, owing to the constantly recurring question as to thenbsp;advisability of uniting a series of specimens under one specificnbsp;name or of emphasizing the existence of slight diflerences by thenbsp;use of distinct names. It frequently happens that the examinationnbsp;of the material in a single collection leads to the view that certainnbsp;forms are specifically distinct; but the abundance of specimens innbsp;several museums often supplies transitional forms which render

specific separation too artificial. In oases where we have a large numher of forms constituting a series, and the extreme typesnbsp;exhibit marked distinctive features, it has been found convenientnbsp;to use a specific term in a comprehensive sense, and to appendnbsp;a second name as indicative of a � form � or variety. The speciesnbsp;Sagenopteris Phillipsi (Brongn.), as used in this sense, includesnbsp;leaves or leaflets differing considerably from one another in sizenbsp;and shape; but from the analogy of recent plants, and from thenbsp;occurrence of more or less connecting links between the extremenbsp;types, it seems preferable to include all under one term, and tonbsp;refer to the more distinct forms by varietal names, which in somenbsp;cases may have been previously used as specific designations. Thenbsp;small form of Sagenopteris named by Lindloy amp; Hutton S. cuneatanbsp;may be spoken of as 8. Phillipsi, var. cuneata, while a fewnbsp;examples of unusually large leaves are referred to as 8. Phillipsi,nbsp;var. major.

My tendency has been to diminish the number of specific names in cases where the data afford insufficient evidence of importantnbsp;differences. It would reduce specific distinctions to an absurditynbsp;to designate by a special name the various forms of cycadean ornbsp;fern leaves which may be grouped around a well-marked type. Atnbsp;best the material is insufficient for accurate diagnosis and determination; and while drawing attention to such forms as affordnbsp;valuable evidence in the recognition of geological horizons, ournbsp;chief aim should be to deal with the fossil specimens on the samenbsp;principles as are applied to recent plants, and to interpret thenbsp;botanical records in a manner best calculated to render them usefulnbsp;as indices of plant development and distribution.

In a letter to Lyell in 1860, Darwin wrote : � How far to lump and split species is, indeed, a hopeless problem. It must in thenbsp;end, I think, be determined by mere convenience.�'

In the description of each species a definition is given after the list of synonyms, and where possible the locale of the type-specimennbsp;has been mentioned. Comparisons of the fossil types with recentnbsp;plants are, for the sake of uniformity, usually discussed at the endnbsp;of the remarks on the synonymy or history of each species.

* I am indebted to my friend Mr. Francis Darwin for permission to quote this passage from an unpublished letter.

The majority of the British Museum specimens are included in the following collections, while some were presented hy Dr. Murray,nbsp;Mr. J. Leckenhy, Mr. J. Williamson, Mr. S. P. Pratt, and others:�

The principal localities are Gristhorpe Bay, Scarborough (often used in a wide sense and in some cases including localities nearernbsp;Gristhorpe Bay than Scarborough), Cloughton Wyke, Haiburnnbsp;Wyke, Whitby, and Saltwiok. (Vide Text-fig. 1, p. 17.)

Group BRYOPHTTA.

Group PTERIDOPHYTA.

GYMYOSPERM^.

Group THALLOPHTTA.

Class ALGAD.

The few specimens described as Algee from the Inferior Oolite rocks of Yorkshire are either too imperfect to determine, or innbsp;all probability may be more correctly regarded as impressions ofnbsp;thalloid Liverworts. Lindley amp; Hutton' described a fossil fromnbsp;Gristhorpe under the name Fucoiies arcuatus, and the same speciesnbsp;is figured in the third edition of Phillips� Geology of the Yorkshirenbsp;Coast � ; there is little doubt, however, that the type-specimennbsp;of Lindley amp; Hutton is an imperfect example of Leckenby�snbsp;Fucoides erectus,^ a species now placed in the genus Marehantites.nbsp;A. still more imperfect fossil from Gristhorpe, named by Phillipsnbsp;Fucoides diffusus,¹ ² may also be doubtfully refeiTed to Leckenby�snbsp;species.

The specimen represented in PL XIX. Fig. 6 was labelled by Bean � Lepidodendron? from the Upper Shale of Scarborough,�nbsp;and in the Museum Eegister the same piece of shale is describednbsp;as a fern stem. On one side of the rock there is a series ofnbsp;irregularly parallel ridges; and on the other face, as shown innbsp;Fig. 6, two sets of ridges intersect, dividing the surface intonbsp;a number of depressed areas, which present a slight resemblancenbsp;to a partially decorticated Lepidodendroid stem. The ridges arenbsp;no doubt ripple-marks produced on the surface of an argillaceousnbsp;sand; the specimen is of some interest as illustrating a possiblenbsp;source of error, and agrees very closely with a photograph ofnbsp;intersecting ripple-marks figured by 'Williamson� in 1885.

Group BEYOPHYTA (MIJSCIYE^).

Class HEPATIC^.

The vegetative plant-body possesses a different organization on the ventral and dorsal sides; it has the form of a thalloid creepingnbsp;plant (thalloid Liverworts), or of a delicate stem with thinnbsp;appendages or leaves without a midrib (foliose Liverworts).

Vegetative body of laminar form, with apparently dichotomous branches, agreeing in habit with the recent thalloid Hepatic�,nbsp;as represented by such a genus as Marcliantia.

8phlt;erococcites areuatus, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, vii. p. 104. Sphmrococcites areuatus, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, foss. p. 26.

1864. Fueoides areuatus, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol Soc. vol. xx. p. 76. 1864. Fueoides erectus, ibid. p. 81, pi. xi. figs. 3a, 6.

Type-specimen. quot;Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge (Leckenby Collection, Xo. 1). Text-fig. 2.

Thalloid body, divided into spreading, dichotomously branched segments, obtusely pointed apioally. The slightly wrinkled surface

shows a distinct and comparatively hroad darker median hand, with lighter-coloured and thinner margins.

The specific name erectus proposed hy Leckenhy in 1864 is adopted in preference to the older term arcuatus, because thenbsp;specimen to which Lindley amp; Hutton applied the latter namenbsp;was much more imperfect than Leckenhy�s type, and it is notnbsp;certain, although highly probable, that the two are specificallynbsp;identical. Leckenhy�s type - specimen presents a striking resemblance to some recent members of the Marchantieae, and, as

jSTathorst also suggested, it would seem to be more fitly referred to the Liverworts than to the Algae. Leckenhy, in defining thenbsp;species, speaks of the occurrence of �fructification in one or morenbsp;rows of ovate vesicles immersed in the frond,� ' but an examinationnbsp;of the type-specimen does not reveal any characters suggestive ofnbsp;organs of fructification. The best examples of this plant are thosenbsp;in the Leckenhy Collection; in the York Museum there are a fewnbsp;specimens of if. erectus labelled Sphcerococcites arcuafus.

The present species of Marchantites bears a close resemblance to M. Zeilleri, Sew.,'¹ from the Wealden rocks of Sussex; thenbsp;two may be identical, but the habit of the older form appearsnbsp;to bo more spreading and open than in the Wealden species.nbsp;A small and imperfect fragment has been described by MM.nbsp;Hliche amp; Bleicher� from the Lower Oolite rocks of �Tancy,nbsp;under the name of Marchantites oolithicus, but the material on

�wMch. the determination is based is too fragmentary to admit of accurate identification.

A more recently described Jurassic Liverwort, Paleohepatica RostafinsMi,'^ from tbe neighbourhood of Cracow, differs from thenbsp;English species in the broader divisions of the thallus and in itsnbsp;generally larger form.

V. 3652. A repeatedly forked specimen, with the habit of a dichotomously branched thallose Liverwort, similar to Marohantianbsp;and other genera. The impression on the sandstone is not verynbsp;clearly preserved, but there is a distinct indication of a thickernbsp;median portion or broad midrib in each branch of the thallus,nbsp;and a thinner lateral margin, which appears as a light-brownnbsp;stain on the surface of the rock. Gristhorpe Bay.

V. 2526. This specimen is labelled in Bean�s writing Fucoides arcuatus. The lobes of the thallus have a breadth of 3 mm.,nbsp;the midrib being 1 mm. wide. The specimen figured by Bindleynbsp;and Hutton as Fucoides arcuatus has precisely the same habitnbsp;of branching, but the drawing suggests a stiffer and less delicatenbsp;plant. In all probability, however, F. arcuatus is merely annbsp;imperfect example of Marohantites erectus.

39.328. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Examples with narrower thalloid branches. On thenbsp;same piece of shale there is an unusually good specimen ofnbsp;Tccniopteris major, L. amp; H. ; also fragments of Nilssonia comptanbsp;(Phill.), Tccniopterisvittata,'��(m.^'B..,eiQ,. Upper Shale: Gristhoi-pe.

39.329. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Several fragments with narrow branches; labelled bynbsp;Bean Fucoides erectus. The present form of the impressions isnbsp;probably, to a large extent, due to the partial destruction of thenbsp;delicate lateral portions of the thallus. Upper Shale : Scarborough.

40,571. An imperfect specimen, labelled Sphcerococcites arcuatus and Fucoides erectus. Gristhorpe Bay.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Bean Coll.

Group PTERIDOPHYTA (YASCULAR CRYPTOGAMS).

Class EQUISETALES.

Perennial plants -with underground branched rhizomes, from which are given off roots and erect branched or unhranchednbsp;aerial shoots. The shoots are characterized by the small vertioillatenbsp;sheathing leaves borne on the slightly swollen nodal regions; thenbsp;nodes are separated by longer or shorter internodes. The sporangianbsp;occur on specially modified sporophylls or sporangiophores, aggregated to form a definite strobilus or spore-bearing cone.

The Equisetales include the single recent genus Equisetum and the fossil genera Equisetites, PJiyllotheca, Schizoneura, Calamites,nbsp;and Archaocalamites ; the genus Equiaetites is the only onenbsp;represented in the Yorkshire Oolite flora.

An accurate diagnosis of the family Equisetacese as including the recent Horsetails and species of Equisetites is practicallynbsp;impossible, as our knowledge of the fossils is far from complete.nbsp;The striking similarity of the fossil stems from Triassic, Jurassic,nbsp;and more recent formations to the widely distributed Equisetums,nbsp;justifies the inclusion of Equisetites in the Equisetaceee as a typenbsp;agreeing in habit, and presumably in structural features, with thenbsp;recent genus; but our information rests solely on externalnbsp;characters, and we know little or nothing as to the anatomy ofnbsp;the fossil Horsetails, nor have we any evidence as to whether thenbsp;sporangia contained spores of one kind only or were heterosporous.

1. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Equisetites columnaris, Brongn.

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Equisetites Beani (Bunb.).

A generic name applied to suob fossil stems as closely resemble the recent genus Equuetum.

The various species of Equisetites are founded on stems, leaves, and strobili, which occur as casts or impressions, and nothing isnbsp;known with certainty as to the anatomical characteristics of thenbsp;fossil forms. The large size of some of the Triassic and Jurassicnbsp;stems and the fine longitudinal striation occasionally seen on thenbsp;surface of the casts, render it probable that some at least of thenbsp;fossil Horsetails grew in thickness by means of the activity ofnbsp;a cambium, as we know to have been the case with the Palasozoicnbsp;Calamitean plants.

It is an unsatisfactory task to attempt to define the distinguishing characters of species of Equisetites, which are usually representednbsp;by fragments of rhizomes or aerial shoots. The leaf-sheaths arenbsp;often imperfectly preserved, and afford uncertain evidence as tonbsp;specific features ; the differences in the diameter of the stemnbsp;fragments and in the length of the intemodes are often such asnbsp;might easily occur in the same plant.

1. Equisetites columnaris, Brongniart.

Oncylogonatum carhonarium, Kbnig, in Murchison, Trans. Geol. Soc. [2], vol. ii. p. 300, pi. xxxii.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Equisetites columnaris^ linger, Gen. spec, plant. foss. p. 56.

1851. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Asterophyllites ? lateralis, Bunbury, Quart. Journ. Geel. Soc. vol. vii.

1856. Calamites lateralis, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. p. 46, pl. iii. fig. 3.

1864. Equisetites columnaris, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77.

1873. Equisetum columnare, Saporta, Pal. Fran9. vol. i. p. 254, pl. xxx. fig. 5.

1877. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Gi. Fhyllothecasibirica, Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. ix. (2'), pl. iv. p. 43.

1878. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cf. P. sibirica, ibid. vol. v. (2), p. 4, pl. i. figs. 9-15.

1894. ? Equisetum blandum, Eaciborski, Flor. Kopal. p. 233, pl. xxvii. figs. 17-27.

Type-specimen. Paris Museum. The specimens from Whitby on which Brongniart�s diagnosis was founded were sent to him hynbsp;the Philosophical Society of York.

Stem reaching a diameter of 5�6 cm., with internodes 13-14 cm. long. The nodal region slightly swollen, at least in the largernbsp;stems or branches, hearing leaf-sheaths closely adpressed to thenbsp;stem with 70-80 linear acuminate teeth. In the smaller branchesnbsp;the leaf-sheaths consist of a smaller number of segments, andnbsp;occasionally occur as isolated sheaths with radiating linear teethnbsp;apart from the branches or lying on the surface of an intemode.nbsp;In the thicker specimens the free distal ends of the teeth havenbsp;usually been broken off, the sheaths having a truncated margin.nbsp;The leaf-segments are separated from one another by a fairly deepnbsp;V-shaped groove, which widens towards the edge of the leaf-sheath, where the teeth become free. The median portion of each

' The figure placed after the number of the volume indicates the position of the paper quoted in the particular volume of the Flor. foss. Arct.

leaf - segment is flat or slightly depressed, and the edges in well-preserved specimens hear small protuberances, which may benbsp;indications of siliceous deposits in the epidermis.

The stem or larger aerial branches bore occasional branches at the nodes, about five at each branching node; the more slendernbsp;specimens sometimes possess still more delicate branches (e.g. Text-fig. 3).

Kodal diaphragms occur frequently on the lower part of the internodes of the smaller branches, or as isolated discs; thenbsp;diaphragms consist of a central circular area of tissue, from whichnbsp;radiate narrow bands separated by slightly broader spaces.

Brongniart defined the species in 1828 as follows:�� E. caule erecto, simplici, laevi, cylindrico, diametro 2-3 poll, sequali, artioulisnbsp;versus basim approximatis, superue distantibus; vaginis ereotis,nbsp;cauli arete applicatis, multideutatis, dentibus brevibus, sed innbsp;acumine filiformi oaduco productis.� ��

In the work of Young amp; Bird (1822)^ aflgure is given of a fairly large Equisefites branch, and additional drawings of the samenbsp;species occur in the second editionpublished in 1828. Thesenbsp;authors refer to Equisetites as a reed-like plant abundant in thenbsp;strata exposed in the cliffs opposite High Whitby; they comparenbsp;the fossils with Equuetum, and regard the vertical position of thenbsp;casts as a proof of their occurrence in situ ; they suggest, however,nbsp;that both stems and matrix may have been transported into theirnbsp;present position. It is interesting to notice that Young amp; Birdnbsp;speak of the occurrence of lateral branches, a fact overlooked bynbsp;later writers. The occurrence of branch-scars protruding throughnbsp;the lower portion of the leaf-sheaths of several specimens fullynbsp;bears out the conclusion of these authors (vide PI. XIX. Fig. 1).

The casts of Equisetites columnaris have long been familiar fossils in the Lower Estuarine beds in the cliffs near Whitbynbsp;and elsewhere ; they often occur in a vertical position in thenbsp;sandstone,^ or as flattened carbonaceous impi-essions on the associatednbsp;bands of shale. Many writers have expressed the opinion thatnbsp;these Equisetaceous plants contributed largely to the formation

of the thin coal-seams of the Estuarine series; the occurrence of an argillaceous hed crowded with small roots immediately belownbsp;the coal has suggested a comparison with the underolays of thenbsp;Coal-measures.

K�nig�s species Oncylogonatum carhonarium,^ from the Brora Coalfield of Sutherland, is no doubt identical with Equisetitesnbsp;columnaris of the Yorkshire rocks; the coal-seams of the Broranbsp;district are considered by K�nig to have been formed, in partnbsp;at least, from the remains of the reed-like plants to which henbsp;applied the above name.¹ ²

In 1829 Phillips² published a figure of a slender fossil stem from Saltwiek under the name Eqimetwm laterale, characterizednbsp;by the occurrence of small circular areas of a wheel-like patternnbsp;on the internodal region. The same form of stem was also figurednbsp;and described by Bindley amp; Hutton² in 1836 ; by these authorsnbsp;the circular discs are compared with the phragma of a Calamite.nbsp;They remark that similar discs were said to occur as isolatednbsp;objects on the surface of the shale (on the authority ofnbsp;� Mr. quot;Williamson, jun.��the late Professor Williamson). Innbsp;1851 Bunbuiy² discussed another example of Phillips� species, innbsp;which narrow spreading leaves were given off from the node as innbsp;Asterophyllitee. The fossil represented in Text-fig. 3 (Ho. 40,561)nbsp;is probably the one which Bunbury had before him, and it isnbsp;certainly the specimen figured by Zigno as Calamites lateralis.nbsp;The long � spreading leaves � of these authors are no doubt slendernbsp;branches, the true Equisetaoeous leaf-sheath being faintly shownnbsp;as a series of small pointed teeth just above the nodes. Heer, mislednbsp;no doubt by the descriptions of Bunbury and Zigno,² proposed tonbsp;transfer Phillips� species to the genus Fhyllotlieca, and Schimper �nbsp;substituted the generic name Schitomura. The circular discs on

* nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Zigno (59), p. 113. Zigno considered the Brora fossil specifically distinctnbsp;from JS. columnaris, and proposed to adopt the name M. Koenigii in place ofnbsp;K�nig�s designation.

the intemodes of this foim have long proved a difficulty, several authors having regarded them as branch - soars occurring somenbsp;distance above the nodal region. Lindley compared them with thenbsp;nodal septa of Calamites, and Schimper afterwards regarded themnbsp;as displaced nodal diaphragms. This is, I believe, the correctnbsp;explanation of the circular discs.

The frequent occurrence of isolated nodal diaphragms renders it probable that the tissue of these organs was strengthened by thenbsp;development of periderm, and possibly by a subsequent sclerifioationnbsp;of the cells. It has been shown '� that the parenchymatous nodal

diaphragms of Calamites developed a layer of cork-tissue, and Jeffrey* has more recently described the pai'tial sclerification ofnbsp;periderm cells in the diaphragms of recent Horsetails.

The specimen (No. 10,379) represented in PI. XIX. Fig. 4 affords a good example of an isolated nodal diaphragm, and innbsp;Fig. 5 of the same Plate a portion of a similar diaphragm isnbsp;surrounded by an imperfectly preserved leaf-sheath; the latternbsp;specimen, from the Leokenby Collection,^ demonstrates the naturenbsp;of the discs, and shows that their usual manner of occurrencenbsp;a little distance above the node is merely the result of displacement. As the hollow branches were crushed by the weight ofnbsp;overlying sediment the diaphragms, being comparatively resistant,nbsp;were squeezed from their original position and flattened oat onnbsp;the intemode.�

It has been the custom to regard the form named by Phillips Equisetum laterale as specifically distinct from Brongniart�s species ;nbsp;but a comparison of numerous specimens of Equisetites columnarisnbsp;and E. lateralis has led me to nnite both under Brongniart�snbsp;designation. Nathorst inclined to this view, as shown by a notenbsp;written on a specimen of E. lateralis in the Leckenby Collection�nbsp;� Eq. columnaris includes Eq. lateralis.� The difference in diameternbsp;between the smaller examples of E. lateralis and the ordinary castsnbsp;of E. columnaris is considerable, but in a large collection it is easynbsp;to find intermediate forms ; the leaf-sheaths also exhibit no distinguishing features, but agree in the form of the segments andnbsp;in their minute surface features.

The Italian specimens figured by Zigno � as Equisetites Veronensis appear to be identical with the common British species, and hisnbsp;species has therefore been included in the above synonymy. Thenbsp;fragments of stems described by Saporta � from rocks referrednbsp;to a Bathonian horizon bears a close resemblance to Equisetitesnbsp;columnaris, and may well be specifically identical; hut in thenbsp;absence of more satisfactory evidence than is afforded by Saporta�s

3 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Specimens of nodal diaphragms may be seen in several collections of Jurassicnbsp;plants; e.g., Oxford, Cambridge, York, Manchester, Scarborough, etc.

figures we may consider the Prench specimens as prohahly identical with, or at least closely allied to, the British species.

Heer � compares his Siberian species, Phyllotheca sihirica, with Phillips� Equisetum laterale, hut recognizes certain small differencesnbsp;which he considers of specific value. There is, however, so closenbsp;a correspondence between Heer�s figures and some examples ofnbsp;the Siberian plant in the British Museum collection and certainnbsp;of the Yorkshire specimens, that it would seem very probable thenbsp;two plants are not specifically distinct.

The specimens figured by Raciborski from the Cracow Jurassic rocks as Equinetites hlandus present a close agreement with suchnbsp;examples of E. oolumnaris as those shown in Pigs. 4 and 5,nbsp;PI. XIX., and in Text-fig. 3.

Although no fertile shoots of E. oolumnaris have been recognized, it is reasonable to assume that they were of the same type as thenbsp;strobili of recent Horsetails, with which the cones of some othernbsp;Mesozoic species of Equisetites closely agree.

It is practically impossible to discriminate accurately between many of the Mesozoic Equisetaceous stems, or to give definitenbsp;diagnostic characters, but it is at least probable that Equisetitesnbsp;oolumnaris is specifically distinct from the more slender Wealdennbsp;species Equisetites Lyelli, Mant.�¹ ² The latter species never reachednbsp;the same girth as the older plant, and the more robust habit of thenbsp;Inferior Oolite and Triassio Horsetails seems to be a well-markednbsp;feature of some importance.

Some of the older species of Equisetites, e.g. E. Muensteri, bear a fairly close resemblance to E. oolumnaris, and, while probablynbsp;specifically distinct, the former plant must be considered, as Schenk ²nbsp;suggests, an analogous species. The specimens figured by Andrae ^nbsp;from Steierdorf and by Tenison-Woods ^ from Queensland are toonbsp;imperfect to admit of satisfactory identification, but the fragmentsnbsp;figured by these authors as Equisetum laterale and E. rotiferum

1 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Heer (77), vol. iv. (2), p. 43, pi. iv. fig. 2; vide also Heer (78), vol. v. (2),nbsp;p. 4, pi. i., and (82), ii. p. 9.

respectively recall the slender branches and leaf-sheaths of the English species.

Numerous examples of Equisetites oolumnaris are met with in practically all collections of Inferior Oolite plants. The smallernbsp;forms, formerly spoken of as Equisetites lateralis, are less common,nbsp;hut good specimens may he seen in the museums of Cambridge,nbsp;Oxford, Manchester, York, Scarborough, and elsewhere.

The large stems of the recent species, Equisetum giganteum, L.,' which grows in the marshes of tropical A.merioa, may be comparednbsp;with the still larger plant, which must have formed a prominentnbsp;feature in the landscape of the low-lying marshy ground borderingnbsp;the Jurassic sea in the north-west of Europe.

This small specimen shows two nodes with the short stumps of two alternating whorls of branches. The knobs or branch-scarsnbsp;occur at regular intervals on each branching node, and the membersnbsp;of each whorl are situated midway between those of the nextnbsp;whorl.

In this cast the pointed tips of the leaf-segments have not been preserved, but the form of the sheaths is clearly indicated.

The large cast, of which the figure represents a portion of one node, measures 49 cm. in length, and affords a good example ofnbsp;the large type of branch with long internodes. The organicnbsp;substance of the stem has been replaced by a thin film ofnbsp;carbonaceous material encircling the sandstone cast; the bulknbsp;of the specimen being no doubt the cast of a large hollow pith.nbsp;The breadth of the branch is 5�5 cm., and the internodes havenbsp;a length of 13-14 cm. The leaf-sheaths consist of 70-80 teeth,nbsp;usually truncate at the margin of the sheath, but in the portionnbsp;represented in Fig. 3 the acuminate distal ends of the teeth arenbsp;faintly indicated. The leaf - sheath projected slightly from thenbsp;surface of the branch, the intervening space being filled with

sand, which separates the carhonaceous surface of the sheath from the coal}^ film on the surface of the main cast.

40,561. Text-fig. 3. [Also in Zigno (56), pi. iii. fig. 3, and Seward (98), p. 275, fig. 63.]

There are fragments of several imperfect specimens lying on the shale; the best example, which is shown in the figure, measuresnbsp;1T2 cm. long and T2 cm. in breadth, the internodes havingnbsp;a length of 4'5 cm. Portions of leaf-sheaths with short teethnbsp;are faintly indicated at the nodes, and distinct impressions ofnbsp;diaphragms occur above the nodal lines. The long slendernbsp;appendages, of a light - brown colour, which were formerlynbsp;described as leaves, are no doubt delicate branches comparablenbsp;to the finer branches of some of our recent Horsetails. Honbsp;trace of nodes can be made out on the surface of the branches,nbsp;but the pi-eservation is far from perfect. A somewhat similarnbsp;specimen from the Yorkshire coast, with traces of branches, maynbsp;be seen in the Leeds Museum.

An isolated nodal diaphragm, showing a central flat area and slightly convex radiating bands of carbonized tissue separated fromnbsp;one another by spaces. These diaphragms are usually about 1 cm.nbsp;in diameter, and have the form of a shallow saucer. Part ofnbsp;a similar diaphragm is seen in Fig. 4, lying immediately above thenbsp;lower leaf-sheath.

The example represented in Fig. 4 (from the York Museum) shows the leaf-sheaths and linear acuminate segments very clearly;nbsp;it is interesting also as being larger than many of the specimensnbsp;of the Equisetites lateralis type, and serves to connect the widernbsp;E. columnaris with the narrow branches usually identified asnbsp;E. lateralis.

The diaphragm of the specimen represented in PI. XIX. Fig. 5 is surrounded by a portion of a leaf-sheath, and affords goodnbsp;evidence in support of the nature of the isolated circular discs,nbsp;which were considered originally to he the scars of branches.

V. 89. Two pieces of stems on which the surface features of the leaf-sheaths are clearly preserved ; on the flat or slightly

concave median portion of each leaf-segment, the outlines of the epidermal cells may he readily detected, and the slightly raisednbsp;edges hear numerous small irregular tuheroles, which may he duenbsp;to the presence of siliceous deposits in the epidermal cells. Onnbsp;some of the nodes five branch-scars are shown; these alternate innbsp;position with the scars on the next node. This form of stem maynbsp;he compared with the type of Calamitean cast known as Calaniitesnbsp;{Eucalamitei) cruciatus, Stemh., from the Coal-measures.^

Egerton Coll.

A. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Part of a stem showing leaf-sheaths, and an imperfect diaphragm flattened

From specimens in the York Museum. {Block lent by the Cambridge University Press.)

V. 2613. The smaller of the two specimens hearing this number affords a good example of a cast of the typical Equiutites columnaris

type, having a smaller diameter than the majority of the cylindrical casts, and each leaf-sheath consists of about forty segments withnbsp;clearly defined surface characters; this specimen may be comparednbsp;with Text-fig. 4, which represents a broad form with the charactersnbsp;of E. lateralu.

V. 3648. Four casts in a vertical position in a finely laminated sandy shale.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Purchased.

52,568. A flattened branch showing portions of several leaf-sheaths and many diaphragms scattered about the surface of the shale. The surface of the internodes is well preserved, andnbsp;presents a finely tuberculated appearance when examined undernbsp;a pocket lens.

10,328. Portions of two flattened leaf-sheaths with the long pointed teeth spread out on the surface of the rock : the spacenbsp;enclosed by the basal portion of the leaf-sheath was no doubtnbsp;occupied originally by a nodal diaphragm, as in the specimennbsp;represented in PI. XIX. Fig. 5.

Other specimens:�V. 26135 (a single node with branch-knobs), V. 2613c, V. 3292 (a block of micaceous sandstone penetrated bynbsp;root-like fossils which may belong to Equisetites), V. 3649, 13,507,nbsp;39,130, 40,468 (part of a flattened leaf-sheath showing goodnbsp;surface features), 40,469, 40,574 (vertical casts in sandstone),nbsp;40,575, 52,583.

2. Equisetites Beani (Bunb.).

1851. Calamites Beani, Bunbury, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. vii. p. 189. 1854. Calamites Beanii, Morris, Brit. Foss. p. 3.

1856. Calamites Beanii, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. p. 45, pi. iii. %. 1. 1869. 1 Equisetum columnare, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. i. p. 267.

1886. Oalamites Beanii, Gardner, Geol. Mag. vol. �i. [3], p. 201, pl. ix. lig. 3.

Type-specimen. Manchester Museum (No. 88). Stems reaching a circumference of 30 and 40 mm., bearing at the well-defined nodesnbsp;leaf-sheaths consisting of numerous long and narrow segments.

The scanty material of this species is insufficient to enable us to give a satisfactory diagnosis. iEquisetites Beani is retained

as a distinct species chiefly on the ground of the greater diameter of the stem than in E. columnaris; in other respects the twonbsp;species appear to be very similar, and it is not improbable that thenbsp;stout easts included under the present species may he unusuallynbsp;large examples of the preceding type.

In 1851 Bunbury proposed the name Calamites Beani for some sandstone oasts of stems from the Inferior Oolite of Yorkshire,

which, had heen previously named by Bean, in unpublished notes, Calamites gigantem. Bunbury�s species is referred to by Schimpernbsp;as being possibly founded on the pith-cast of JEgiiisetites columnaris.nbsp;In 1886 Starkie Gardner published a figure of a specimen whichnbsp;was identified by Williamson as an example of Calamites Beani,nbsp;and compared by the latter author with recent arborescentnbsp;Gramineee. Text-fig. 5 is taken from the block used by Gardnernbsp;in his paper on Mesozoic Angiosperms, in which the specimen isnbsp;quoted as possibly a Monocotyledonous stem. The cast shows twonbsp;conspicuous nodal regions, but no trace of leaf-sheaths, and affords nonbsp;definite evidence of its Equisetaceous nature. Casts like that figurednbsp;by Gardner occur in the quot;Whitby, York, and Scarborough Museums,nbsp;and in some cases roach a length of over 40 cm.; they have thenbsp;form of cylindrical or more or less compressed stems, divided bynbsp;transverse nodal constrictions into fairly long internodal regions,nbsp;and occasionally the casts of the several internodos occur as separatenbsp;pieces, fitting together by clean-cut faces. The larger specimennbsp;represented in Text - fig. 6 shows not only nodal regions, butnbsp;distinct indications of leaf-sheaths which reveal the Equisetaceousnbsp;character of the casts. Some of the pith-casts of these stems exhibitnbsp;a fine longitudinal striation on the surface, which suggests thenbsp;presence of a woody cylinder enclosing the wide pith ; it is probablenbsp;that those large stems grew in thickness by the developmentnbsp;of secondary vascular tissue, but we have as yet no precisenbsp;information as to their anatomy. In the York Museum therenbsp;are some large circular discs 10 cm. in diameter, enclosed in thenbsp;matrix of a rock containing a cast of Eguisetites Beani, whichnbsp;undoubtedly represent the nodal diaphragms of this species.

This large cast measures 27 cm. in length, and at the second node from the bottom has a breadth of 12 cm. There are sevennbsp;nodes shown on the stem : the two lowest nodes exhibitnbsp;distinct impressions of numerous narrow segments of leaf-sheaths,nbsp;the impressions having the form of tapering narrow ridgesnbsp;representing the grooves between the segments, as seen innbsp;surface-view. It is possible that this form of stem may belong

to Hquisetites columnaris, but until further evidence of their connection is forthcoming Bunhury�s specific name may benbsp;conveniently retained.

On the same piece of rock there are some good examples of the pinnate fronds of W��liamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.). BecMes Coll.

V. 2725(�. A fairly common typo of cast of this species, in which the nodal regions are marked by distinct constrictions, butnbsp;without any indication of leaf-sheaths; 33 cm. in length, 15 cm.nbsp;broad. The fine longitudinal striations in such casts as V. 2725�,nbsp;of which there are several examples in the Museums of York,nbsp;Whitby, and Scarborough, suggest the impression of a cylindernbsp;of wood: it has already been pointed out that these larger stemsnbsp;probably possessed the power of secondary thickening.

V. 3929, 39,093 [vide Williamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.)], 40,577. Similar fiattened casts, with nodal constrictions and surface striationnbsp;as in V. 2725a.

Class LYCOPODIALES.

Perennial plants of terrestrial, epiphytic, or aquatic habit, usually herbaceous, but more or less shrubby in a few tropicalnbsp;species. Stems for the most part long and slender, dichotomouslynbsp;or monopodially branched; in some forms the stems are short,nbsp;unbranched, and tuberous. The sporangia are large and exannulate,nbsp;occurring singly either in the axil of a more or less modified leafnbsp;or on the lower part of the upper surface of a leaf.

The living genera included in this class are the isosporous Lycopodium, Phylloglossum, Psilotum, and Tmesipteris, also thenbsp;heterosporous Selaginella and Isoetes. Isoetes, Selaginella, andnbsp;Lycopodium are represented by British species, but the othernbsp;genera have a restricted tropical distribution. The extinct typesnbsp;Lepidodendron, Sigillaria, and other Palaeozoic plants belongingnbsp;to the Lycopodinae played an important part in the vegetation ofnbsp;the Carboniferous and Permian periods; they differed from thenbsp;modern genera in their arborescent habit and in their power ofnbsp;secondary growth in thickness.

Herbaceous or small arborescent plants, agreeing in habit with recent species ot Lycopodium and Selayinella, with branched stemsnbsp;bearing small leaves, either all of the same form or dimorphic,nbsp;disposed spirally or in rows. Sporangia in the axil or on thenbsp;upper face of a leaf, or borne on leaves forming a terminal strobilus.*

The generic name Lyoopodites was pi�oposed by Brongniart in 1828 for plants with pinnate branches bearing leaves disposednbsp;spirally or in two opposite rows, which on falling did not leavenbsp;a well-marked or definite loaf - sear. The only Inferior Oolitenbsp;species {Lyoopodites WilUmnsoni) included by Brongniart in hisnbsp;genus is now recognized as a Conifer, most of the species being ofnbsp;Balseozoic age. While some of the specimens placed in Lycopoditesnbsp;are in all probability small twigs of Lepidodendron, there are a fewnbsp;species which must be retained in Brongniart�s genus as differingnbsp;in certain respects from Lepidodendron.

It is usually the case that the specimens described as species of Lycopodites have the form of delicate twigs bearing small crowdednbsp;leaves, but with one or two exceptions there are no indicationsnbsp;of the sporophylls, nor is there any evidence as to anatomicalnbsp;characters. The meagre nature of the material makes it impossiblenbsp;to decide in some instances whether Selayinella or Lycopodium is-the most nearly allied genus, and it is safer, therefore, to usenbsp;Brongniart�s generic name in a comprehensive sense as includingnbsp;fossils, which may belong either to the heterosporous SelaginellaceiEnbsp;or to the homosporous Lycopodiaceae.

Lycopodites falcatus, Bindley amp; Hutton.

1831. Lycopodites falcatus, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. i. pl. Ixi. 1838. Muscites falcatus, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, faso. vii. p. 38.

Stem slender, branched in an apparently dichotomous manner, hearing leaves disposed in two rows, and fairly closely arranged,nbsp;hut not contiguous. Leaves thin, entire, broadly falcate, with annbsp;acute apex pointing upwards or slightly inclined towards the axisnbsp;of the branch. Sporophylls unknown.

Lindley amp; Hutton' speak of the plant, which they describe as LycopoMtes falcatus, as no doubt identical with a specimen figurednbsp;by Young amp; Bird,^ bearing �small round crowded loaves�; butnbsp;it is not improbable that the drawing given by the latter authorsnbsp;represents a piece of the conifer Brachyphyllum mamillare, Brongn.

There is little doubt that Lyeopodites falcatus should be regarded as a Lycopodinous plant more nearly allied to the genus Selaginellanbsp;than to Lycopodium. At the end of the diagnosis of the speciesnbsp;given by Phillips,^ it is stated that he detected �marks of stipulse �nbsp;on one of the specimens ; these probably represent imperfectlynbsp;preserved leaves on the upper surface of the stem, differing in theirnbsp;smaller size from the two-ranked leaves, which are distichouslynbsp;disposed. In the typo-specimen of Lindley amp; Hutton (39,314)nbsp;there are in places faint suggestions of smaller leaves, but thenbsp;preservation is not suificiently good to render this point certain.nbsp;The probability is that this species, as Schenk* suggests, agreesnbsp;more closely with the recent genus Selaginella than withnbsp;Lycopodium. Solms - Laubach, in speaking of fossil Lycopods,nbsp;goes so far as to say that �all Lyeopodites with distichousnbsp;leaves may be reckoned without hesitation among heterophyllousnbsp;forms,� � that is, among plants of the typo of Selaginella. The

habit of the plant, as well as the arrangement and thin texture of the leaves, and the probable presence of two kinds of leaves,nbsp;all point to a comparison with recent species of Selaginella.nbsp;Nathorst,' on the other hand, has referred to Lycopodites fdloatmnbsp;as a representative of the Lycopodium type of plant.

Such examples of Lycopodiaccous plants as have been described from foreign Mesozoic localities do not offer any close resemblancenbsp;to the English species. A species figured by Heer^ from thenbsp;Jurassic rocks of Siberia as Lycopodites tenerrimus is characterizednbsp;by narrower leaves, and agrees closely with Taxodium gracile,^nbsp;described by the same author. A few specimens figured bynbsp;Oldham amp; Morris¹ ² from the Jurassic rocks of the Eajmahal Hillsnbsp;as Araucarites (?) gracilis, and afterwards placed in the genusnbsp;Cheirolepis by Eeistmantel, may be compared with Lycopodites.nbsp;EeistmanteP calls attention to the similarity of the Indian andnbsp;British fossils, but suggests that both should probably be placednbsp;in the Coniferee rather than in the genus Lycopodites. Therenbsp;can be little, if any, doubt as to the Lycopodiaccous nature ofnbsp;Lycopodites falcatus, with which the Indian species appears to benbsp;closely allied.

The York Museum contains an unusually good example of Lycopodites falcatus. Fragments are met with also in the Scarborough, Cambridge, and other collections of Inferior Oolite plants.

The drawing in the Fossil Flora gives a fairly accurate idea both of the habit of the plant and of the form of the leaves.nbsp;The slender axis is repeatedly forked, and bears apparently twonbsp;rows of alternately disposed leaves. The leaves, which are innbsp;the form of carbonaceous films on a sandy shale, are not preservednbsp;sufficiently well to enable one to describe them in detail; theynbsp;are broadly falcate in form, about 4 mm. in length, with annbsp;acute apex directed upwards and slightly inwards. At the tip of

* nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Heer (78), ii. pi. i. fig. 7; and (77), ii. pi. xv. figs. 2-8.nbsp;^ Ibid. (78), ill. pi. viii. fig. 32, etc.

one of the branches there appear to he slight indications of the presence of smaller leaves in addition to the larger ones, suggestingnbsp;a comparison with Selaginella.

V. 3675. A good specimen, showing the manner of branching and spreading habit of growth. Lower Sandstone, Cloughton.

Class FILICALES.

Stem comparatively small in proportion to the size of the leaves. The members of this class are usually isosporous, hut in a fewnbsp;forms heterosporous; sporangia borne on leaves which are eithernbsp;identical with the foliage leaves or more or less modified. Bootsnbsp;developed from the stem in aoropetal succession, or borne on thenbsp;leaf-stalks. The stem may ho either polystelio or monostelic.

Order LEPTOSPOEANOIATA:.

The Filices or true Ferns are isosporous. The spores on germination produce a green independently growing prothallus,nbsp;bearing the sexual organs. Leaves relatively large, in nearly allnbsp;cases with circinate vernation, bearing scaly ramenta or filamentousnbsp;hairs; the sporangia are usually in groups or sori, either naked ornbsp;enclosed by an indusium, home on leaves which may be identicalnbsp;with, or more or less distinct from, the vegetative leaves. Withnbsp;a few exceptions the sporangia possess a well-marked annulus;nbsp;each sporangium is formed from a single epidermal cell. Stemnbsp;horizontal and creeping, oblique or vertical, bearing scatterednbsp;fronds or terminating in a crown of leaves. �

A. Genera assigned to existing families.

Sori borne on the under surface of ordinary fronds, composed of a few comparatively large sporangia, witb tetrahedral spores, sessilenbsp;on a central columnar receptacle, which in the recent genusnbsp;Matonia spreads out into an umbrella - like indusium, with thenbsp;recurved margin tucked in below the ring of sporangia. Sporangianbsp;characterized by an obliquely vertical incomplete annulus.

The recent Malayan fern Matonia pectinata, E. Br., first described by Eobert Brown ^ in 'Wallich�s Plants Asiatim ra/riores has longnbsp;been recognized as a species which shares certain characters withnbsp;the Cyatheacese and other families, but differs in some of its featuresnbsp;from other members of the Filices. Moore�* referred this speciesnbsp;to a special tribe, Matoninese, and in recent years Baker, Christ,nbsp;and others have treated the genus Matonia as the type of a distinctnbsp;family, exhibiting points of contact with both the Cyatheaceaenbsp;and Gleicheniacese. In 1888� a second species, Matonia sa/rmentosa,nbsp;Baker, was discovered by Mr. Charles Hose at Niah, Sarawak, innbsp;Borneo; this fern agrees in the structure of the sori with thenbsp;older species, but is strikingly unlike it in the form of the fronds.nbsp;It is of interest to note that the anatomical structure * of Matonianbsp;pectinata entirely confirms the conclusions as to the isolated positionnbsp;of this species among existing ferns, which were based entirely onnbsp;external characters. Comparisons have often been made betweennbsp;Matonia pectinata and various Mesozoic species ; these rest notnbsp;merely on a similarity or identity of habit, but on the morenbsp;trustworthy resemblance of the sori and sporangia. Solms-Laubach�nbsp;cites the genera Laccopteris, Selenocarpus, Andriania, Clathropteris,nbsp;and BictyopJiyllum as leptosporangiate ferns which agree in certain

respects both with the Gleicheniaceee and Cyatheacese ; Micro-dictyon, Gufbiera, and Carolopteris may he added to this list as closely allied genera. In his memoir on the Jurassic plants fromnbsp;the neighbourhood of Cracow, Raciborski' includes the two fossilnbsp;genera Laccopteris and Microdictyon in the family Matonineae ; thenbsp;latter genus, instituted by Saporta in 1873,'� I have been led tonbsp;consider identical with Presl�s Laccopteris.

This genus, founded on, specimens of sterile and fertile fronds from the Wealden of North Germany, is thus defined by Schenk:�

�Polia sterilia et fertilia conformia flabellato-pinnata, segmenta pinnatifida. Nervi piimarii excurrentes, secundarii angulo subrectonbsp;egredientes dichotomi, ramuli simplices. Sori biseriales oblonginbsp;indusiati. Sporangia reoeptaculo in ramulo affixa. Annulusnbsp;obliqnus.�

It has been the custom to adopt Schenk�s genus for such fossil fronds as agree in habit and in the form of the sori with the recentnbsp;species Matonia pectinata, but it is advisable not to attach toonbsp;great prominence to the habit of the fronds as a guide to familynbsp;or generic affinity. The habit of Matonia sarmentosa is entirelynbsp;distinct from that of the other species of the genus, and it isnbsp;probable that older species may have existed which possessednbsp;sori and sporangia of the Matonia type, but differed from Matonianbsp;pectinata in the form of their leaves. Since the publication ofnbsp;the British Museum Catalogue of Wealden ferns, in whichnbsp;Matonidium is dealt with, an interesting Cretaceous species,nbsp;Matonidium Wiesneri, has been described by Krasser from Cenomanian rocks in Moravia, a type which exhibits a strikingnbsp;resemblance to Matonia pectinata; the Moravian plant approachesnbsp;the recent species even more closely than the allied Wealden andnbsp;Jurassic fern, Matonidium Qoepperti. Potonie� has suggested the

advisability of regarding Matonidium Wiesneri as a variety of Matonia pectinata rather than as a distinct species.

Matonidium Goepperti (Ettingshausen).

(PI. XI.; Text-fig. 7.)

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fecopteris polydemtyla, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, foss. p. 177.

1864. Fecopteris polydactyla, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 80, pi. xi. figs. \a and 15.

1869. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Laccopteris Goepperti, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. i. p. 582 ; Atlas^

1870. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fecopteris AUhausii, Trantscliold, Nouv. M�m. Soc. nat. Moscon,,

1871. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Matonidium Goepperti, Schenk, Palaeontographica, vol. xix. p. 219,

1874. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Matonidium Goepperti, Schimper, loc. cit. vol. iii. p. 507.

1875. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Matonidium Goepperti, Schenk, Palaeontographica, vol. xxiii. p. 160,.

1878. Alethopteris elegans, Bupont, Bull. Ac. Koy. Belg. vol. xlvi. [2], p. 396.

1881. Matonidium Goepperti, Heer, Secc. Trab. Geol. Portugal, p. 16, pi. XV. figs. 1-6.

1891. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Laccopteris polydactyla, Saporta, Pal. Franc;, vol. iv. p. 384.

Type. Largo specimens of sterile and fertile segments. In the Berlin Collection.

Fronds of similar habit to those of Matonia pectinata, R. Br., fan - shaped or pedate, with pinnate or pinnatifid pinnae, thenbsp;ultimate segments linear, slightly falcate, bluntly pointed. Sorinbsp;numerous on the under side of the ultimate segments, in two rows,nbsp;one row on each side of the prominent midrib, circular or oval innbsp;form, covered by an indusium attached to a short central columnarnbsp;receptacle, which bore the sporangia arranged in a circle. Sporangianbsp;with an oblique annulus.

The specimens of Matonidium Goepperti hitherto discovered do not afiord any satisfactory evidence as to the exact number of thenbsp;sporangia, nor do we know in detail the character of the venation.nbsp;It would appear that the sporangia were more numerous in eachnbsp;sorus than in the recent species, and so far as is known thenbsp;venation appears to agree with that in Matonia pectinata.

Reference may bo made to Vol. I of the quot;Wealdon Catalogue for remarks on the synonymj� of this species. The plant namednbsp;by Phillips Peoopteris cmspitosa, and described by him in hisnbsp;Geology of YorhsMre, is included as a synonym of Matonidiumnbsp;Goepperti in my former list, but an examination of the type-specimen in the York Museum has convinced me that Phillips�nbsp;specimen must bo referred to the genus Laccopteris.

The characteristic disposition of the long narrow pinnae is clearly shown, but the petiole itself has not been preserved. Portions ofnbsp;nine pinnae are seen, the longest measuring 16-5 cm. in length andnbsp;about 1 cm. broad, tapering very gradually towards the distal end.nbsp;The segments are crowded, narrow, and falcate, with a slightlynbsp;obtuse apex. The lower surface of the j)inn8e is representednbsp;in the drawing; in each pinnule the midrib forms a prominentnbsp;ridge, on either side of which there are indistinct depressionsnbsp;marking the position of the sori. The whole surface of eachnbsp;segment appears to have been covered with crowded sori, as innbsp;the specimen shown in Text-fig. 7, A. In some of the segmentsnbsp;a small umbo in the centre of the soral depression marks thenbsp;position of the receptacle.

A fairly large specimen, a portion of wliicli is shown in Fig. 1 to illustrate the origin of about ten fertile pinnae from the summitnbsp;of the petiole. The leaf is preserved with the upper face exposed,nbsp;the sori appearing as two rows of circular elevations. In somenbsp;places where the carbonaceous film has been removed there appearnbsp;to be indications of the individual sporangia, hut these are notnbsp;at all clear. The small basal pinnules are well shown. Labellednbsp;by Bean Pecopteris multicaulis.

This fragment shows the short rounded pinnules on the basa. portions of the pinn�, and illustrates the occurrence of sori onnbsp;even the smallest segments. In Matonidium Goepperti, as innbsp;Matonia peotinata, all the segments of a frond appear to be fertile.nbsp;The figure represents the sori as circular elevations, with a centralnbsp;depression, projecting from the lower surface of the pinnules.

Fragments of fertile pinnte in ironstone, showing both upper and lower surfaces. In the enlarged piece shown in the Text-figure (A)nbsp;the under surface is uppermost, bearing two rows of crowdednbsp;elliptical sori. The circinately coiled leaf (Fig. 7, B) preserved innbsp;the same piece of rock belongs probably to this species; it agreesnbsp;exactly with the closely coiled frond of the recent species, Matonianbsp;pectinata.

V. 3661. Several pinnae of a largo spreading frond; the reverse piece of V. 3660.

V. 3662. The upper part of a petiole, bearing several palmately disposed pinnae. Labelled by Leokenby � A new Peoopteris fromnbsp;the Lower Sandstone and Shale near Scarborough.�

1. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Laccopteris polypodioides (Brongn.).

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Laccopteris Woodwardi (Leckenby).

This genus was instituted bj' Presl in 1838 for some fragments of fern fronds from the Keuper of Strullendorf, the type speciesnbsp;being named Laccopteris elegans. The generic characters are thusnbsp;defined:�

� Prons pinnata, nervi primarii excurrentes, nervi secundarii dichotomi ramulis furcatis simplicibusve, mediis in medio dorsonbsp;soriferis. Sori biserialcs, foveae semiglobosae immersi, e sporangianbsp;compositi.�

The same genus is described also by Goppert,' Schenk,'* and other writers. Schenk�s account of the species of Laccopteris isnbsp;the fullest, and some excellent figures of the sori, sporangia, andnbsp;spores accompany his plates of the fronds of this genus. Morenbsp;recently Zeiller'* has demonstrated the very close resemblance�nbsp;previously refei�red to by Schenk�between Laccopteris and thenbsp;recent genus Matonia. The published figures of the Ehaetic speciesnbsp;of Laccopteris represent the veins as dichotomizing and notnbsp;anastomosing; but an examination of specimens in the Britishnbsp;Museum and in the Palaeontological Institute of Berlin hasnbsp;convinced me that anastomoses are fairly frequent. A specimen of

^ Schenk (67), p. 93, pis. xxii.-xxv. Vide also Schenk (88), p. 38, fig. 20. 3 ZeiUer (85).

Laccopter� e�egans (Prcsl) from Bayreuth., in the British Museum Collection (Jfo. 500), shows anastomosing veins in some of thenbsp;more perfectly preserved pinnules.' The Laceopieris venation maynbsp;he compared with that of Matonia peetimia, hut in the latter fernnbsp;the anastomes between the lateral veins are rather less numerousnbsp;than in Laccopteris. The close agreement between Laccopterisnbsp;and Matonia as regards the form of the frond, the structure ofnbsp;the sori and sporangia, and the venation characters afford sufficientnbsp;evidence for the inclusion of the genus in the Matonineae. quot;Wenbsp;may define the genus Laccopteris as follows:�

Trends pedate, in habit like those of Matonia pectinata, E.. Br., with pinnate or pinnatifid pinna? ; ultimate segments linear innbsp;form, with a well-marked midrib giving off numerous secondarynbsp;veins which branch diohotomously, and are in places connected bynbsp;short lateral anastomoses. Sori circular, forming a single rownbsp;on each side of the midrib ; the sporangia are usually few innbsp;number, from five to fourteen, with an oblique annulus andnbsp;tetrahedral spores.

1. Laccopteris polypodioides, Brongniart.

1828. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fhlebopteris polypodioides, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 372,

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fecopteris cccspitosa, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pi. viii. fig. 10.

1836. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Hemitelites polypodioides, Goppert, Foss. Farm. p. 336, pi. xv.

1838. Steffensiapohjpodioides, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, fase. v�. p. 125. FMebopteris polypodioides, ibid. p. 163.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Flemitelites polypodioides, Unger, Gen. spec, plant. foss. p. 161.

1851. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fecopteris cmspitosa, Bunbury, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. vii. p. 186.

1855. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Folypodites crenifolius, Andrae, Foss. Flor. Siebenb�rgens, etc., p. 35.

1856. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Folypodites Lindleyi, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. p. 162.nbsp;FMebopteris polypodioides, ibid. p. 172.

1864. FMebopteris contigua, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. G�ol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 76. F. propinqua, ibid. p. 80.

Type-specimens. Paris Museum. [Type of Phlehopterispropinqua and P. polypodioides, L. amp; H., in the Scarborough Museum; typenbsp;of P, crenifolia in the York Museum.]

Pronds of the Laccopteris hahit; a long petiole subdivided at the summit into several spreading pinnatifid pinnse with linear ultimatenbsp;segments passing gradually into shorter or deltoid segments towards

the base of each pinna. Sori borne in two rows, on the under surface of the segments, one row on each side of the midrib; eachnbsp;sorus consists of as many as twelve or fourteen large sporangianbsp;(Text-fig. 10), with an oblique annulus and tetrahedral (?) spores.nbsp;The sori are circular in form, probably without an indusium; butnbsp;this point is difficult to decide with certainty, the individualnbsp;sporangia being attached to a central receptacle as in Matonia.nbsp;Each segment is traversed by a well-defined midrib, from whichnbsp;numerous secondary veins are given off at a wide angle ; these formnbsp;a series of elongated areolae parallel to the midrib, as in the recentnbsp;genus Wbodwardia, and from the areolae or meshes forked and

anastomosing branches pass off to the border of the segments ; the veins form fairly regularly radiating meshes below each sorus.nbsp;(Text-fig. 11, and PI. XIII. Fig. 2.)

Brongniart ^ inclines to the view that the specimens named by Bindley amp; Hutton Pecopteris propinqua are probably notnbsp;specifically distinct from P. polypodioides ; an examination ofnbsp;the type-specimen of the former � species � in the Scarborough

Museum convinood me that it is identical with Brongniart s typo. �lathorst,' who regarded Laecopteris as a more suitablenbsp;generic designation than PMehopteris, has expressed the view thatnbsp;Phlehopteris pohjpodioides, P. crenifolia^ and P. propinqwa arenbsp;specifically identical; the same author also states that Phillipsnbsp;species Pecopteris ligata ^ is identical with Laecopteris polypodioides.

The specimen figured by Phillips (in the York Museum) as Pecopteris ecBspitosa, and redrawn in Text-fig. 8, is undoubtedlynbsp;a badly preserved fragment of a loaf of Laecopteris pohjpodioides; ^nbsp;the characteristic habit of the frond is clearly shown, and innbsp;some of the pinnules there are distinct traces of sori.

* The type-specimen is said by Hathorst to be in the Oxfor useuin. ^ Seward (99), p. 201 (footnote).

a specimen in the Whithy Museum (!No. 2379) which was figured inaccurately both by Young amp; Bird and by Phillips, and by thenbsp;latter referred to Zigno�s genus Maramp;aria. The type-specimen ofnbsp;Marmria Simpsoni is in all probability a young frond of Laccopterisnbsp;polypodioides; the linear pinnules of the adult leaf are representednbsp;by irregular rounded crenulations on the margin of the pinnse, andnbsp;bear a resemblance to the small and partially developed ultimatenbsp;segments on a young frond of Matonia pectinata.

There is a striking similarity between the Inferior Oolite species L. polypodioides and the older species L. affinis, L. Mwnsteri, andnbsp;L. Ooepperti figured by Schenk and other authors! The fernnbsp;described by Etheridge from the Ipswich Coal-measures, Newnbsp;South quot;Wales, as PMelopteris alethopteroides may be comparednbsp;with Laccopteris polypodioides? It is evident that Brongniart�snbsp;type is a member of a family which in the Mesozoic period wasnbsp;represented by numerous and closely allied forms with a widenbsp;geographical range. At the present day Matonia pectinata survivesnbsp;as one of two species which have persisted within narrownbsp;geographical limits as tropical representatives of a once vigorousnbsp;and widely spread family of ferns.

This specimen illustrates very clearly the characteristic habit of the frond; five pinnse are shown converging towards a commonnbsp;petiole. The form of the leaf is precisely similar to that innbsp;Matonia pectinata and in Matonidium Goepperti (Ett.). Eachnbsp;pinna has a broad central axis bearing fairly broad ultimatenbsp;segments with a midrib and anastomosing secondary veins. Onenbsp;of the lower deltoid segments is slightly enlarged in Fig. la;nbsp;this shows the forked and anastomosing secondary veins. Thenbsp;longest pinnule measures 1'2 cm. in length.

In this specimen there are portions of five or six pinnse not far from their common origin from the petiole ; these bear

crowded, 'broad linear segments with the venation characters clearly preserved. The lowest segment has a length of 8 mm.,nbsp;and the longest is 2 cm. long. Most of the examples of thisnbsp;species have longer, narrower, and less crowded segments thannbsp;the two specimens represented in PI. XII. This specimen isnbsp;labelled by Bean Phlebopteris frondosa.

Labelled by Bean Phlelopteris contigua and P. polgpodioides. This specimen shows portions of largo pinnae with long linearnbsp;segments preserved in ironstone and showing well-defined venation

Fio. 10.�Laecopteris polypodioides. A single soins. [No. V. 2522.3 V. 2522. Text-figs. 10 and 11b.

Part of a fertile pinna in the form of a brown impression, as in 39,252, but the pinnules are fertile, also longer and farther apar .nbsp;The sori are circular and arranged on either side of the midri ,nbsp;each sorus consists of about twelve sporangia with a well-markenbsp;o'blique annulus. In most of the sori the sporangia have fallennbsp;off, leaving a gap in the lamina. Such sporangia as have beennbsp;preserved are thoroughly carbonized, but the prominent walls^ onbsp;the annulus cells stand out distinctly as black ridges. The^ drawmgnbsp;in Text-fig. 11b shows the venation clearly and the dispositionnbsp;�of the circular sori; the fragment from Stamford, shown in

Fig. lie, is probably specifically identical with the Yorkshire species. Cf. the figures and sori of Laocopteris by Schenk amp; Zeiller.

Part of a large pinna, with pinnules longer and more tapering than those of 39,252 (PI. XII. Fig. 2). The segments arenbsp;always contiguous basally, where they are attached to the axisnbsp;of the pinna. Sori indistinct.

V. 3666. A clearly preserved impression in ironstone of large pinnules which vary in breadth, the fertile segments being narrowernbsp;than the sterile.

10,333. Imperfect fertile pinnules, in some of which the margin is slightly undulate, but this character is by no meansnbsp;constant, and is in part due to inequalities on the surface ofnbsp;the rock.

10,371. Large sterile segments, 4-5 cm. long and 6 mm. broad,, showing very distinct venation.

39,243. A fairly large example of fertile pinnules, about 4 cm. in length and 4 mm. broad; individual sporangia may be recognizednbsp;on some of the segments.

Other specimens:�V. 3667, 11,014, 39,246 (a badly preserved specimen labelled by Bean Pecopteris undans), 39,247, 39,253,nbsp;40,469.

2. Laccopteris Woodward! (Leckenby).

1864. Fhleboptcris Woodwardi, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx., p. 81, pi. viii. fig. 6.

1873. Mierodictyon Woodwardiamm, Saporta, Pal. Pran^. vol. i. p. 313, pl. xxxiii.

Habit in all probability identical with that of the preceding species. The venation of the ultimate segments similar to that ofnbsp;Laccopteris polypoiioides, but the veins that spring from the largenbsp;areolae next the midrib are more numerous and closer together;nbsp;the sori are circular and, except in their smaller size, apparentlynbsp;identical with those of Brongniart�s species.

Leckenby founded this species on some fragments of pinnules identical with the specimen represented in Text-fig. Ha. It

A. �Pinnule of Laccopteris TFoodwardi from the Inferior Oonbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,, �� j.al

is probable that Leckenby�s type is specifically distinct from Laccopteris polypodioides, hut the difference between the^ two emsnbsp;appears to be slight; the former is characterized by its sma er

pinnules, the more numerous veins, and the greater number and smaller size of the sori. Laecopteris Woodwardi is represented innbsp;the English rocks by single detached pinnules, and no examplesnbsp;occur comparable in size and preservation to the fronds ofnbsp;L. polypodioides figured in Plates XII. and XIII.

V. 217 (Text-fig. 11a) and V. 2522�. Fragments of fertile-pinnules showing the characteristic small circular sori and the numerous veins given off at a wide angle from the areolse.

40,670. Xumerous fragments; the broadest of which has a breadth of 7 mm.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Bean Coll.

Genus TODITES.

The term. Todites is employed in preference to the recent generic name Todea, which has been used by some authors, on the groundnbsp;that we are here dealing with a fossil type which it is inadvisablenbsp;to designate by the name which is applied to recent ferns. Thenbsp;sporangial characters and the form of the frond afford satisfactorynbsp;evidence not only of Osmundaoeous affinities, but lead us to regardnbsp;the fossils as very closely allied to the recent fern, Todea larha/ra,.nbsp;Moore.

The generic name Todeopsis has been employed by Eenault ^ for some sporangia from the Culm of d�Esnost which in the form of thenbsp;annulus recall those of Todea. Considering the great difference innbsp;age between llenault�s specimens and the Lower Oolite fern, andnbsp;the absence of decisive evidence as to the affinity of the Frenchnbsp;fossils, it is probably wiser to employ a distinct name for thenbsp;Jurassic Osmundaoeous fern.

1828. Pecopteris TViUiamsonis, Brongniart, Prodrome, p- 57.

P. WilUamsonis, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 324, pl. cx. figs. 1 and 2. P. whitbiensis, Biongniait, Prodrome, p. 57.

P. ichitbiensis, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 321, pl. cix. figs. 2-4. P. tenuis, ibid. p. 322, pl. c.x. figs. 3, 4.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;_

Pecopteris recentior, Phillips, Geol. Torks. p, 148, pl. viii. g. o.

? P. haatata, ibid. pl. vi�. fig- 17.

P. curtata, ibid. p. 148, pl. vi�. fig. 12. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;, i

NeuToptefis recentioTy Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. i. p . xviii. J*ecopteyis JVilUctmsonis, ibid. vol. ii. pl* cxxvi.

Pecopteris dentatdy ibid. vol. iii. pl. clxix.

A.cTost%ch%tes }Killia?nsoms, G�ppert, Foss. Farm. p. 285.

�europteris recentioTy ibid. p. 205.

AXethopteris dentatay ibid. p. 306.

Neuropte'i'is fecentioVy Sternberg, Flor. Vorwolt, v�. p. 76.

Pecopteris W�lliamsoniSy ibid. p. 151.

P. Suttonianay ibid. p. 157.

Alethopteris dentat�y Broun, Ind. Pal. p. 23.

Acrosticliites Williamsoniy ibid. p. 10.

Neuropteris recentiory ibid. p. 811.

Cladoplilehis dentatay Brongniart, Tableau, p. 105.

G. Williamsonisy ibid.

O. recentiory ibid.

C. U7ititSy ibid.

G. wJnthiensiSy ibid.

Alethopteris dentatay linger, Gen. spec, plant. foss. p. 149. Acrostichites WilliamsoniSy ibid. p. 141.

Neuroptens recentiory ibid. p. 85.

Acrostichites Jf^ilh'aMsoniSy Bnnbury, Quart. Journ. Geol. oc-vol. vii. p. 187.

Pecopteris Suttonianay Morris, Cat- Brit. Foss. p. 15.

Acrostichites Williamsonisy ibid. p. 1.

Neuropteris reoentiovy nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;13.

Pecopteris Huttonianay Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. p* 133-Acrostichites Williamsonisy ibid. p. 149.

Pecopteris recentiory ibid. p. 127.

^ Pichopteris microphylla, ibid. p. 122, pl. xv. %- 5.

1864. Pecopteris dentatay Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77. Acrostichites WilliamsoniSy ibid. p. 76.

Neuropteris receniioTy ibid.

1868. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Acrostichites TFilliamsonii, Eichwald, Leth. Eoss. p. 17, pl. ii. fig. 3.

1869. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fccopteris {Acrostichites) IVilliamsoni, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g.nbsp;vol. i. p. 528.

Alcthopteris recentior, ibid. p. 566.

Gladophlebis ckntata, ibid. vol. iii- p. 505.

C. recentior, ibid.

Fecopteris deutata, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 208, lign. 21.

F. curtata, ibid. p. 209, j)!. viii. flg. 12.

F. WilUamsonis, ibid. p. 209, lign. 23, pl. x. fig. 7.

F. recentior, ibid. p. 211, pl. viii. fig. 7.

1877. ? AspUnimn whitUeme, Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. iv. (ii.) p. 39, pl. iii. figs. 1, 2 ; pl. xx. fig. 4.

? A. whitbiense tenue, ibid. p. 39, pl. iii. fig. 3; p. 94, pl. xvi. fig. 8; pl. XX. figs. 1 and 3.

Todea WilUamsonis, Schenk, Palaiont. vol. xxxi. p. 168, pl. iii. fig. 3-Gladophlebis virginiensis, Fontaine, Potomac Flora, p. 70, pl. �i.

figs. 3-8 ; pl. iv. figs. 1 and 4.

C. parva, ibid. p. 73, pl. vi. figs. 1-3.

C. distans, ibid. p. 77, pl. xiii. fig. 4.

Asplenium whitbiense, Yokoyama, Journ. Coll. Sci. Japan, vol. iii. p. 32, pl. iii. fig. 3.

Fecopteris curtata, Schimper amp; Schenk, Handbuch, p. 100.

F. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;recentior, ibid.

Todea WilUamsonis, Eaciborski; Bngler, Bot. Jahrb. xiii. p. 2, pl. i. figs. 7-10.

Acrostichites tennis, Fox-Strangways, Tab. Foss. p. 128.

A. Willimnsonis, ibid.

Fecopteris dentata, ibid. p. 132.

Todea WilUamsonis, Eaciborski, Flor. Krak. p. 158, pl. vi. figs. 17-20. Gladophlebis ichitbiensis, ibid. p. 215, pl. xxi. figs. 1, 2, 8-10.

G. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;solida, ibid. p. 79, pl. xxiv. figs. 10-13.

Todea Williamsemis, Hartz, Med. om Gr�nland, vol. xix. p. 232, pl. xii. figs. 4 and 4�.

Pinnules attached by a broad base, closely set on the axis of the pinna, but the longer fertile segments of the larger pinnae arenbsp;farther apart and more open in their arrangement. Slightlynbsp;falcate, the side towards the rachis is strongly coutcx, and thenbsp;outer margin is straight or concave, and bulged outwards towardsnbsp;the base of each segment; the apex of the pinnules is acute ;nbsp;the margin is in some cases, especially in the larger segments,nbsp;slightly lobed. In the larger pinnse the pinnules may be betweennbsp;l'5-2 cm. in length. Towards the distal tapering end of thenbsp;pinnae the pinnules are more falcate, and assume a short deltoidnbsp;form (as in Pecopteris dentata, L. amp; H.), and the acute apex isnbsp;directed forward. The venation is of the CladopMebisnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;each

segment being traversed by a midrib from which spring forked secondary veins, and the midrib itself breaks up into diohotomouslynbsp;branched veins towards the tip of the segments.

The fertile pinnules have usually the same form as the sterile, but in the larger segments the breadth is often less in proportionnbsp;to the length than in the sterile segments, and the margin of thenbsp;former often shows a tendency towards irregular lobing.

The sporangia are large and circular, and of the Osmundaceous type ; they usually cover the whole of the under surface of thenbsp;fertile segments, as in Todea.

The long list of synonyms demonstrates the confusion with regard to the nomenclature of this common and characteristicnbsp;Jurassic fern. The confusion is considerably increased by the factnbsp;that the fern to which Brongniart gave the name Pecopterisnbsp;whitbiensis�a species usually considered to have been very widelynbsp;distributed during the Jurassic period�is not identical with thenbsp;plant to which Bindley amp; Hutton and several other authors appliednbsp;the same designation. Brongniart�s Pecopteris whitbiensis I havenbsp;no doubt is specifically identical with his Pecopteris Williamsonis,nbsp;and with the specimen described under this name by Bindleynbsp;and Hutton. On the other hand, the Pecopteris whitbiensis ofnbsp;Bindley amp; Hutton and of several other writers is, I believe,nbsp;specifically identical with Pecopteris denticulata of Brongniart;nbsp;but this question is more fully discussed under the latter species.nbsp;Pecopteris tenuis of Brongniart is included in the above synonymynbsp;as identical with Todifes Williamsoni, as the form of the pinnulesnbsp;and the habit of the frond appear to agree exactly with thenbsp;characters of that species. Hathorst has expressed similar views

90 with regard to the identity of these ferns/ and Brongniart � himselfnbsp;speaks of the �extreme afSnit� � of the two species. The specimensnbsp;referred by Phillips and Bindley amp; Hutton to Fecopteru recentiornbsp;differ from Brongniart�s Pecopteris Williamsonis in the larger andnbsp;longer pinnules, but an examination of several large fronds innbsp;various collections has convinced me of the identity of the twonbsp;forms. Specimens of undoubted Todites WilUamsoni are often metnbsp;with in English museums bearing the name Pecopteris recentior,nbsp;given to. them by Bean and other contemporaries of Phillips andnbsp;Bindley amp; Hutton, and there is no doubt that the examplesnbsp;so designated are simply the lower parts of large fronds ofnbsp;T. WilUamsoni. Phillips� figure of what he names Pecopterisnbsp;curtata represents the characteristic fertile pinnules of Todites.

The type-specimens of Pecopteris dentata, B. amp; H., were fortunately discovered in the Williamson Collection in the Manchester Museum; � they exhibit the characteristic pinnro and closely setnbsp;short and broad segments of Todites WilUamsoni, agreeing exactlynbsp;with such specimens as 39,250 (PI. XIV. Fig. 7), V. 3654, andnbsp;others, and with the figures of Pecopteris whitbiensis of Brongniart.

In 1836 G�ppcrt adopted his generic name Acrostichites for Pecopteris Williamsonis, on account of the manner of occurrence ofnbsp;the sporangia as shown in the figure of Bindley amp; Hutton. Manynbsp;authors have retained this genus, but as Schenk and Baciborskinbsp;have demonstrated, the structure of the sporangia clearly pointsnbsp;to the inclusion of the species in the Osmundace� ; the sporangialnbsp;characters being such as we arc familiar with in Todea andnbsp;Osmunda.

The figures given by Zigno of a portion of a fertile bipinnate frond, which ho names Bichopteris microphylla,^ bear a strikingnbsp;resemblance to Todites, and it is probable that the Italian plantnbsp;is specifically identical with the present species. There is a closenbsp;agreement between Acrostichites Goeppertianus^ from the Germannbsp;Khsetic beds and Todites WilUamsoni, but there are certain small

^ Since this was written the type - specimen has been reflgured ; yido Seward (00), pi. i.

'* Zigno (56), pi. XV. fig. 5. s Schenk (67), p. 45; pi. v. fig. 5 ; pi. vii. fig. 2.

differences in the form of the pinnules which render the inclusion of Schenk�s species in the list of synonyms inadvisable; the two-forms, however, are closely allied.

Amongst the numerous specimens of ferns of the Cladophlehis type figured by Heer from the Jurassic and Cretaceous rocks ofnbsp;Siberia and other northern regions, we find several fronds, or rathei�nbsp;fragments of fronds, which are probably closely allied to or evennbsp;identical with Todites Williammii. He applies the generic name-Asplenium'^ to many of the leaves without adducing satisfactorynbsp;evidence of the relationship to the recent genus. The fertile fragment of Asplenium whithiense figured by this author appears to-agree in the distribution of the sporangia and in the shape of thenbsp;segments with the present species, and differs from the specimensnbsp;in which the sori bear a resemblance to those of Asplenium. �Whilenbsp;feeling confidence in the identity of some of Heer�s so-callednbsp;Asplenium species from Siberia with Todites Williamsoni, it isnbsp;practically hopeless to attempt an accurate determination of thenbsp;species without a careful examination of the fossils themselves.

In Fontaine�s Potomac Flora, which we now know to include both �W�ealden and Jurassic species, there are several examples ofnbsp;Cladophlehis fronds which may be reasonably identified withnbsp;Todites Williamsoni. Fontaine�s zeal for the institution of newnbsp;species led him to adopt new names for plants which in some casesnbsp;he admits bear a striking resemblance to known European forms;nbsp;he has frequently described under distinct specific names portionsnbsp;of fronds which one would reasonably expect to find as parts ofnbsp;one large leaf. Cladophlehis virginiensis, Font., is in all probabilitynbsp;identical with Todites ; it agrees very closely with the Englishnbsp;specimens with the larger pinnules, but in the absence of fertile-pinnee it is almost impossible to speak with certainty. Thenbsp;examples with smaller pinnules which he names Cladophlehis parvanbsp;agree exactly with the smaller forms of Todites Williamsoni, asnbsp;represented in PL XXI. Fig. 6 of this Catalogue; similarly, hisnbsp;C. distans is probably identical with the same species. Fontainenbsp;refers to the similarity of his Cladophlehis parva and Pecopterisnbsp;dentata of Lindloy amp; Hutton, and adds, �one may well hesitatenbsp;to separate them � ; but he considers the venation is not quite

�92 identical. An examination of the type of Lindley amp; Hutton leadsnbsp;me to recognize the venation characters as being in the closestnbsp;agreement.

It is to Schenk and Eaciborski that we are indebted for the detailed examination of the sporangia of Todites Williamsoni:nbsp;the former author* published a figure of a fertile pinnule bearingnbsp;well-preserved sporangia in his paper on the plants collected bynbsp;Szechenyi in China, and Eaciborski� has since confirmed Schenk�snbsp;conclusions. There are several ferns figured by different authorsnbsp;as Asplenium whitbyense, which may be identical with Todites,nbsp;but in many cases it is impossible to speak positively withoutnbsp;seeing the specimens.� The rich flora of the Jurassic rocks of thenbsp;Cracow district contains several excellent specimens of Todites ;nbsp;some of these are referred to T. Williamsoni by Eaciborski,nbsp;while others, which I believe to be specifically identical, arenbsp;placed under different names. This author uses the specificnbsp;designation whithiensis in hrongniart�s sense, and includes undernbsp;that name certain fronds which cannot be separated from Toditesnbsp;Williamsoni. Eaciborski�s figures in Bugler�s Jahrluch and in hisnbsp;Jurassic Flora of Cracow should be consulted as the best so farnbsp;published of the sporangia of Todites.

It is, I believe, safe to assert that the recent Australian and South African fern Todea harlara, Moore, is the species whichnbsp;agrees most closely with one of the commonest plants in the fernnbsp;vegetation of the Inferior Oolite period.

The last English specimen of Todites Williamsoni that I have seen in which the sporangial characters are clearly shown is in thenbsp;Beckenby Collection, Cambridge (No. 48). The Museums of York,nbsp;Scarborough, Manchester, and Whitby contain numerous examplesnbsp;of this common Inferior Oolite species, bearing a variety of names,nbsp;e.g., Pecopteris Lindleyana, Neuropteris reoentior, W. undulata,

species of Acrosticliites figured by Fontaine in the Older Mesozoic Flora of Virginia * and Todites Williamsoni.

A large specimen 45 cm. in length, bearing crowded linear pinnae springing from the broad rachis at a wide angle. Thenbsp;longest pinna measures 15-5 cm. in length; the pinnules arenbsp;broad and short, and closely set on the long pinna axis. Thisnbsp;example shows very clearly the characteristic habit of the frond,nbsp;the long and very gradually tapered pinnas, and the crowded,nbsp;short, and broad pinnules, with their inner margins stronglynbsp;convex and the outer edge straight or slightly concave andnbsp;bulging outwards towards the broad base. The venation is clearlynbsp;shown. Cf. this specimen and the examples with larger pinnules,nbsp;e.g. 14,202.

This specimen, a portion of which is represented in the figure, affords a good example of the common fertile frond of Toditesnbsp;Williamsoni. The rachis is 8 mm. broad, and bears pinnae 1'3 cm.nbsp;in breadth; the under surface of the pinnules shows the midribnbsp;and secondary veins distinctly, and scattered circular pits markingnbsp;the position of sporangia. (PI. XV. Pig. 3.) Cf. the longernbsp;fertile frond of the same type, 39,271.

An instructive specimen of a large sterile frond, 19 cm. in length, of the form figured by Lindley amp; Hutton as Pecopteris dentata.nbsp;The rachis gives off numerous crowded pinnae, the longest of whichnbsp;is 14 cm. long and 1�3 cm. in breadth ; as shown in the figure, thenbsp;ultimate segments become more falcate and sharply pointed towardsnbsp;the tips of the pinnae. The margins of the pinnules appear to benbsp;entire, but in some of them the margin is slightly irregular; eachnbsp;pinnule is traversed by a midrib, from which are given off forkednbsp;secondary veins at an acute angle.

This specimen may be compared with Cladophlehis parva, Pontaine, and with the smaller specimens of C. virginiensis ofnbsp;the same author.

There is no doubt as to the identity of such a specimen as 39,274 and the type-specimen of Pecopteris dentata of Lindley amp; Hutton.

Part of a frond of the same form as 39,274 (PI. XXI. Fig. 6). Some of the pinnules have a slightly dentate or irregular margin,nbsp;which appears to bo an original character, and not entirely thenbsp;result of decay.

A fertile frond with rachis 17 cm. long. The pinnules have a more or less undulated outline, as shown in the enlarged drawing,nbsp;but the specimen is most probably specifically identical withnbsp;Todites Williamsoni.

The apical portion of a frond, showing the linear pinnse with the short and broad curved pinnules, passing up through serratenbsp;segments into the pinnate apex. In the Leckenby Collection,nbsp;Cambridge (Xo. 48), there is a more perfect specimen with an

apex identical 'witli that of 39,250 (Mg- 7) and hearing on the lower part of the frond fertile pinnules with well-preservednbsp;sporangia. The pinnae of these specimens are identical with thosenbsp;of the frond figured hy Lindley amp; Hutton as Pecopteris dentata.

This specimen shows portions of large pinnse almost at right angles to the rachis. The longest pinnules are about l'3cm. innbsp;length, and of thin texture; there are no definite teeth, but thenbsp;margin of some of the segments is slightly irregular or wavy.nbsp;Towards the tip of the pinnae the segments assume a more falcatenbsp;form, but in the basal portions they are practically straight.

This type of specimen is very difficult to determine; it bears a close resemblance to some forms of CladopUebis denUculatanbsp;(Brongn.), but the broad bases of the pinnules and the habit ofnbsp;the frond point to Todites WilUamsoni as the more likely species.nbsp;Gristhorpe Bay.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Presented hj Dr. Murray,

V. 2521. An imperfectly preserved fertile frond, labelled by Bean Pecopteris curtata. Long pinnae are attached at a widenbsp;angle to the broad rachis; the fertile pinnules have a somewhatnbsp;ragged outline, and are longer and narrower than the sterilenbsp;pinnules of such a pinna as that of Fig. 5 (39,226). The specimennbsp;is evidently from the lower part of a fertile frond, where thenbsp;pinnules are longer and less crowded on the pinnae than in thenbsp;smaller fronds of the type represented in PI. XV. Fig. 1 (13,491).

V. 3654. Part of a large frond, showing in some of the pinnse a gradual transition from the longer and straighter pinnules tonbsp;the shorter, falcate, and more acutely pointed segments ; a passagenbsp;from the form originally described as Pecopteris recentior to that

named by Lindloy P. dentata. Labelled by Bean Neuropteris recentior. Of. the fertile pinnules of 39,233 (Text-fig. 12).

V. 3655. Bachis 35 cm. long. Tbe pinnules of the Pecopteris recentior type. Of. some of the pinnules of this specimen withnbsp;those shown in Text-fig. 12 (39,233).

V. 3656. liachis 29cm. long; the longest pinna 18cm. This-example is of the form represented in Tig. 2, PI. XV. (39,234), and illustrates the habit of a frond with the long, narrow, and crowdednbsp;pinnte bearing short and broad segments.

V. 3658. Portions of two pinna) with pinnules showing well-preserved veins. The margin of some of the segments is slightly irregular and suggestive of lobin

V. 3668. A fine frond, with large pinna; and pinnules l'2cm. long. Of. 39,277, etc.

V. 3664. Part of a fertile frond. The pinnules of the same type as those in 39,233 (Text-fig. 12), and closely resembling thenbsp;sterile segments of 39,230.

10,369. Similar to 39,233 (Text-fig. 12). The numerous sporangia are represented by circular pits on the lower surfacenbsp;of the segments.

134,992. This specimen affords an example of the larger fertile segments with an irregularly lobed margin; some of the pinnulesnbsp;have an entire margin like that of the sterile pinnse.

13,505. Similar to 134,992. A piece of a broad sterile pinna

1 cm. broad, and the longest pinna roaches a length of 18 cm., wi large pinnules similar to those of V. 3655, etc.

39,231. Part of a very large frond; rachis 1-4 cm. broad, with long spreading pinnse 2�S cm. in breadth; the pinnules are anbsp;at right angles to the pinnse, and the pinnae of the lower par onbsp;the specimen are also approximately at right angles to e racnbsp;Labelled by Bean Peeopteris hastata, Phill.

39,271. A fertile frond with a rachis 1-2 cm. broad. Short and stumpy pinnules bearing sporangia, as in the specimen s ownbsp;in PI. XY. Pig. 1 (13,491).

39,277. This form of frond, with large pinnules 1-6 cm. long, hoars a distinct resemblance to Cladophlehis denticulata, u enbsp;piutLoc are more crowded, th.e frond has a less open ha it, ancnbsp;the segments are quot;broader at the base. One pinna has a enj,nbsp;of 23 cm.

other specimens :~Y. 2520, V. 2527, 8250, 13,505, 39,228, 39,262 (labelled by Bean Peeopteris curiata), 40,468, 40,469.

Several examples of this species are included in the collections of York, Scarborough, Whitby, Manchester, and other places.

It is not always an easy matter to draw a satisfactory distinction between fossil ferns which exhibit the characters onbsp;the Cyatheacese, and those which should be compared withnbsp;recent species of Damllid^ quot;While admitting with Kathorst thanbsp;genus Pavallict, was probably represented in the Jurassic ^nbsp;by near allies, I have been led to conclude that the Cya eacesenbsp;played a prominent part in the fern floras of the Mesozoic peno

1. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongniart).

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Coniopteris quinqueloba (Phillips).

Brongniart made use of this generic name for such fossil fern fronds as show characters more or less intermediate betweennbsp;Pecopteris and Sphempteris, and agree with the recent Dioksoniesenbsp;in the form of the sori. Saporta adopted this term and, likenbsp;Brongniart, he quotes Tympanophora of Bindley amp; Hutton as thenbsp;type of a fei�tile pinna of the genus Coniopteris. The followingnbsp;definition is given by Saporta of Brongniart�s genus:�

� Be genre Coniopteris ainsi constitue comprend des esp�ces a pinnules steriles, plus ou moins r�tr�cies a la base, lob�es,nbsp;denticul�es sur les bords et pourvues d�une nervation pinn�e;nbsp;les fructifications, en forme de clou, de rein ou de coin, plus ounbsp;moins �largies au sommet, sont dispos�es vers 1�extr�mit� desnbsp;nervures seoondaires qu�elles terminent; Ie limhe contraot� a disparanbsp;en tont ou en partie, et la pinnule, dans les portions fertiles desnbsp;frondes, Ie trouve presque r�duite aux seules mesures �largiesnbsp;en clou et servant de support aux sores. Ces organes dispos�s ennbsp;forme de r�oeptacle, de texture �videmment coriace, sont g�n�rale-ment rang�s deux par deux de chaque c�t� de la m�diane.� ¹ ²

Solms - Baubaoh,'² in referring to the Jurassic fem originally named by Brongniart Pecopteris Murrayana, and by some othernbsp;authors included in the recent genus Thyrsopteris, advocates thenbsp;retention of the generic designation Coniopteris in preference tonbsp;a term implying identity with a recent genus. There is little doubtnbsp;that the Jurassic fern described in this Catalogue as Coniopterisnbsp;hymenophylloides is very closely allied to some recent species ofnbsp;BieJesonia as well as to the monotypic genus Thyrsopteris-, butnbsp;rather than make use of such terms as JDieJesonites or Thyrsopteris,nbsp;it is a safer plan to retain the genus Coniopteris and definitelynbsp;include the species among the Cyatheaoese. Schimper also applies

5Brongniart�s genus to some of tlie species originally placed in ^ is group Sphenopteris- DicTisonioideSi including the Yorkshire specie^

C. Murrayana and Tympanophora racemosa. Por reasons^ sta e below, I regard most of the specimens previously identified asnbsp;Sphenopteris, Peoopteris, Tlvyrsopteris, or Coniopteris MurrmjmMnbsp;as identical with Sphenopteris hymenophylloides, Brongn., and t enbsp;latter specific name has therefore been adopted.

1. Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongmart).

PI. XYI. Pigs. 4-6 ; PI. XVII. Pigs. 3, 6-8 ; PI. XX. Pigs. 1 and 2 ; PL XXI. Pigs. 1-4.

4828. Sphenopteris hytnenophylhides, Brongiiiart, Hist. veg. foss. p. pi. Ivi. fig. 4.

1835. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphenopteris argiita, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. jil. clxvui.nbsp;Tympanophora simplex, ibid. pi. clxx. a.

.1849. Sphenopteris hyincnophylloides, Brongniart, Tableau, p. 10 . Coniopteris Mtirrayana, ibid. (pars).

.1850. Symmiophyllites Phillipsn, Huger, Gen. spec, plant, foss. p. 12�. Pecopteris Mnrrayana, ibid, (pars), p. 179.

d851. Sphenopteris neplirocarpa, Bunbury, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. quot;vo gt; p- 179, pi. xii, figs. \a and l�.

1856. Hynienophyllites PhilUpsH, Zigno, Flor- foss. OoUt, vol. i. p-if. Mnrrayana, ibid. p. 92.

Of. Sphenopteris �unhmjmms, Oldham amp; Morris, Pal. Ind. pi. xxxii. p. 34.

Of. Pecopteris lohata (pars), ibid. pi. xxix. p. 52.

8phe7iopUris hymenophylloides, Leckenby, Quart. Joum. Geol. Soc. vol. XX. p. 77.

S, nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nephrocarpa, ibid. p. 79.

Fecopteris'i Murrayana, ibid, (pars), p. 76.

Tympanophora racemoamp;a, ibid. p. 79.

T. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;simplex, ibid.

Sphenopteris (Picksonioides) hymenophijlloides, Sohimper, Trait. paL v�g. vol. i. p. 395.

S. {P.) nephrocarpa, ibid. p. 395.

Coniopteris Murrayana, ibid. p. 469.

Sphenopteris Pellati, Saporta, Pal. Franc;, vol. i. p. 278, pi. xxxi..

fig- 1-

P Coniopteris conferta, ibid. p. 289, pi. xxxi. fig. 3.

Coniopteris Murrayana, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. iii. p. 471. Sphenopteris Murrayana, Phillips (pars), Geol. Yorks, p. 212, lign. 26.nbsp;S. affinis, ibid. p. 213, lign. 30.

S. dissocialis, ibid. p. 214, lign. 32.

S. hymenophylloides, ibid. p. 215, lign. 34.

S. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;muscoides, ibid. p. 217, pi- x. fig. 10.

Tympanophm'a simplex, p. 219, lign. 43.

T. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;racemosa, p. 219, lign. 42.

Thyrsopteris Murrayana, Ileer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. iv. (2) p. 30, pi. i. fig. 4; pi. ii. figs. 1-4; pi. viii. fig. IIJ.

? Adiantites Schmidtiamis, ibid. pi. ii. fig. 12.

Thyrsopteris Maakiana, ibid. p. 31, pi. i. figs. 1-3, 5, 6.

Thyrsopteris Murrayana, ibid. vol. v. (2) p. 1, pi. i. fig. 6.

Picksonites elavipes, ibid. p. 33, pi. ii. fig. 7.

Thyrsopteris Maakiana, Nathorst, Berattelse, p. 38.

Picks07iia nephrocarpa, ibid. p. 56.

? Thyrsopteris orientalis, Schenk, China, pi. Hi. fig. 4.

? Picksotiia coriacea, ibid. figs. 5, 6.

? Picksonia nephrocarpa, Yokoyama, Journ. Coll. Sci. Japan, vol. iii. 1889, p. 25, pi. i. fig. 1.

Thyrsopteris Murrayana, ibid. p. 22, pi. xii. fig. 5.

? Adiantites Meerianus, ibid. p. 28, pi. xii. fig. 1.

? Sphenopteris minutuloha, Saporta, Pal. Franc;, vol. iv. pi. Ivi. Thyrsopteris Murrayana, Eaciborski, Flor. Krak. p. 130, jjl. x.

figs. 15 and 16 ; pi. xii. figs. 17-21.

Picksonia Heerii, ibid. p. 174, pi. x. figs. 5-14.

P. Zarecmyi, ibid, (pars), p. 175, pi. xii. figs. 8, 9, 11, and 12. Thyrsopteris {Sphenopteris) Murrayana, Fox-Strangways, p. 136.nbsp;Sphenopteris affinis, ibid. p. 134.

S. dissocialis, ibid. p. 135.

Pickswiia {Sphenopte^-is) hy^nenophylloides, ibid. p. 130.

P. (S.) nephrocarpa, ibid.

Sphenopteris muscoides, ibid. p. 135.

Type-specimens. Sphenopteris hymenophylloides, Brongn., in the Paris Museum. [S. arguta, L. amp;H., Manchester Museum.' S. nephro-mrpa, Bunh., Leokenhy Coll., Cambridge. S. Murray ana, withnbsp;fertile pinnse of Tympanoplwra racetnosa, figured by Lockenhy, in thenbsp;Leokenhy Coll., Cambridge. S. muscoid.es, Phill., York Museum.]nbsp;Frond tripinnate; pinnae linear acuminate, attached to the rachisnbsp;nt a wide angle ; the pinnules yary considerably in size and shape,nbsp;in some forms they have a few broad and rounded lobes and innbsp;�others the lamina is deeply dissected into narrow linear segments.nbsp;The fertile pinnules bear the sori at the ends of the veins; thenbsp;lamina is usually much reduced, and in extreme cases the fertilenbsp;�Segments agree closely with those of Thyrsoptens elegans, Kze., ornbsp;Dichsonia Bertervana, Hook. The sori are partially enclosed innbsp;�a enp-shaped indusium; the sporangia appear to have an ohliq[uenbsp;nnnulus of the Cyatheaceous type. The two lowest pinnules ofnbsp;�a pinna are often characterized by their unusual shape, the lowernbsp;half of each pinnule consisting of long spreading and irregularnbsp;ApUeUa-Vik% lobes (vide PI. XXI. Pigs. 1-4).�

Brongniart�s figure of the type-specimen of Sphenopteris Tiymeno-phylloides agrees very closely with the example represented in PI. XX. Pig. 1 of this Catalogue; the only difference being thatnbsp;Brongniart�s specimen is a somewhat large form. Phillips� speciesnbsp;B. stipata is included by the Prench author as a synonym ofnbsp;B. hymenophylloides. The following is the original diagnosis ofnbsp;B. hymenophylloides;�

� S. foliis hipinnatis, tenuissimis, pinnis lineari - lanceolatis, rachi alato; pinnulis approximatis, ovatis, pinnatifidis, lohis ovatisnbsp;tridentalis, inferiori et exterior! (versus apiocm pinnarum) major!,nbsp;pinnatifido; nervulis tenuissimis.�

Brongniart compares S. hymenophylloides with the filmy ferns Symenophyllum and Triehomanes, hut with his usual astutenessnbsp;he expresses the opinion that there is a more perfect analogy withnbsp;some of the recent Dicksonias, e.g. B. rubiginosa, B. dissecta, etc.

Phillips� species, S. stipeda, is represented in the first edition -of the Geology of Yorkshire by a very poor figure; in the third

� Cf. certain Paleozoic ferns some of which Potoni� has referred to the genus Alloiopteris �. Potoni� (99), p. 139.

edition it is transferred to S. hynienophylloides, and compared witb the recent species Bavallia eanariensis, Smith.

In the Geological Survey of the Yorkshire Coast, by Young amp; Bird, some small specimens of Sphenopteroid ferns are illustratednbsp;by very inadequate and crude figures, some of which certainlynbsp;represent Brongniart�s S. hymenophylloides; the original of fig. 5,nbsp;pi. ii. of the first edition of this work is undoubtedly a fragmentnbsp;of the present species.'

Among the numerous examples of ferns in the Museums of Whitby, Scarborough, Cambridge, York, and elsewhere, whichnbsp;I regard as specifically identical with Coniopteris hymenophylloides,nbsp;there are several labelled by Bean and other�s Sphenopteris ornbsp;Pecopteris Murrayana. This brings us to the question of thenbsp;possible identity of the plant which Brongniart named Pecopterisnbsp;Murrayana and his species S. hymenophylloides. It is probablenbsp;that under the former designation the Trench author included morenbsp;than one species; some of the specimens, e.g. that of fig. 3,,nbsp;pi. cxxvi.,^ I am of opinion should be referred to Coniopteris hymeno-phylloides, but some of the others may bo retained under the name-Sphenopteris Murrayana. Brongniart�s fig. 3 of S. Murrayananbsp;agrees closely with Fig. 2, PI. XXI. and with Pig. 6, PI. XVI. ofnbsp;this Catalogue. A Bornholm fern, Pecopteris Pingelii, is considerednbsp;identical with Sphenopteris Murrayana, and this species maynbsp;probably be added to the synonymy under C. hymenophylloides.

There are some other species figured in the ITistoire which should jjerhaps be transferred to the latter species; the fragmentsnbsp;named by Brongniart Sphenopteris crenulata may well be identicalnbsp;with C. hymenophylloides, but on this point it is difficult to speaknbsp;with certainty (cf. PI. XX. Pig. 1, and Brongniart�s pi. Ivi. fig. 3).,nbsp;Sphenopteris denticulata, Brongn., is another species which maynbsp;be compared with C. hymenophylloides, but so far as it is possiblenbsp;to base an opinion on the figure, it would seem more probablenbsp;that it is identical with S. Williamsonis, Brongn. (cf. Brongniart�snbsp;figure� and PI. XVII. Pig. 2).

An examination of the type-specimen of Sphenopteris arguta of Bindley amp; Hutton leads me to regard that species as identical with

Coniopter� hymenophjlloiies} Tke fragment drawn by W�liamson in pl. clxviii. of tbe Fossil Flora ^ is precisely similar to enbsp;specimens represented in PL XX. Pig. 1 and in PL XYI. Pig¹ ²

In the third edition of Phillips� Geology of Torhshire there are portions of various Sphenopteroid fronds figured under severanbsp;specific names, hut in many cases the drawings are not acctu�a enbsp;enough to render possible the recognition of the type-specimen^nbsp;Some of the species of Sphenopteris instituted in P i ips quot;nbsp;are no doubt identical with C. JiymenophylloiAes: ofnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,f

mentioned S. affinis, agreeing with PI. XX. Pig- 2 , a so . s ^ and S. dissoeialis. It is clear that the fertile pinn� o enbsp;originally named by Lindley amp; Hutton Tympanopnbsp;compared by them to an alga, are of the same type as we nnbsp;find among Cyatheaceous ferns, the sori being partially enclose ynbsp;a eup-shaped indusium and consisting of several sporangia wnbsp;an obliquely vertical annulus. It has been the custom o mnbsp;authors to consider this Tympanophora form of ferti e pinna c osnbsp;allied to, or identical with, Kunze�s recent species of t enbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;IP

genus Thyrsopteris, now confined to Juan Pernan ez. of this generic name has, however, been much too wi e y usenbsp;pal�obotanieal writers. I have elsewhere drawn attention onbsp;obvious misuse of this generic name by Pontaine in his o omacnbsp;Flora? Other writers have adopted, to a less degree, t e samnbsp;misleading use of this genus. It is true that some of the examp enbsp;of fertile pinnse from the Lower Oolitic rooks are pracnbsp;identical with those of Thyrsopteris ekgans and are in a pro anbsp;bility very near allies of this recent species, but we fin preoinbsp;similar fertile pinnse in other genera of recent Cyatnbsp;the species Dichsonia Bertervana, Hook., represented in ex gnbsp;In this species the lamina of the fertile segments is consinbsp;reduced, and the indusium consists of a cup with two ips,nbsp;two-lipped form of the indusium is not a character easy tonbsp;in a fossil specimen, nor is it by any means very obvious mnbsp;examples of recent fronds.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;, �v

There is the question of the identity of various fertile pinn� met with in association with sterile pinnu

C. hymenophylloides. Lindley amp; Hutton instituted two species, Tympanophora simplex and T. racemosa; Bunbury described anothernbsp;species in which the lamina of the fertile pinnules is less reduced,nbsp;as in SpJienopteris nephrocarpa, and compared this type with recentnbsp;species of Dicksonia. All these can, however, be connected bynbsp;intermediate forms, and we have insufficient evidence to justifynbsp;their recognition as distinct species. In the Tympanophora simplex

Fig. IZ.�Dichsmiia Bertervam, Hook. (From a specimen in the British Museum Herbarium.)

type the sori are larger and more prominent than in T. racemosa, of which a single pinnule bears several sori ; this difference is,nbsp;however, most probably due to a form of compensation, that isnbsp;to say, where we have one sorus on a pinnule the production ofnbsp;sporangia is greater than in cases where the sporiferous tissuenbsp;is less concentrated and divided between four or five sori.nbsp;Moreover, in such a specimen as that in Fig. 3, PL XXI. we

�have a transition from a pinnule of tlie racemosa type to others of the simplex form. The pinna shown in Fig. 4 of the same platenbsp;recalls S. neplirocarpa of Bunbury, and from this type we passnbsp;by gradual transitions, marked by an increasing reduction of thenbsp;lamina, to the form represented in Figs. 6 and 8, PI. XVII.nbsp;These details are more fully dealt with in the description of thenbsp;individual specimens.

The same type of fertile segment is found also in some of Heer�s Siberian ferns referred by him to Thyrsopteris andnbsp;DicTisonia,; e.g., B. elavipes, T. Maahiana, and T. Mwrrayana.nbsp;Zigno�s species Hymenophyllites Leckenhyi, from the Italian Oolite,nbsp;is another form closely resembling the fertile pinna? of Coniopterisnbsp;hymenophylloides. Finally, Raciborski figures some fertile leavesnbsp;as Bicksonia Jleerii, which are probably identical with the Englishnbsp;species; and his species B. Zareeznyi might also be reasonablynbsp;referred to the same specific type.

There are several recent species with which Coniopteris hymeno-pthylloiies may be compared. The fertile pinna? of Thyrsopteris elegans, Kze.,^ are practically identical with some examples of thenbsp;fossil species (e.g., PL XVII. Figs. 6 and 8 ; PL XXI. Figs. 3 andnbsp;3�); there is also a fairly close agreement between the sterilenbsp;segments of the fossil and recent types. The fertile segments ofnbsp;Bicksonia Bertervana, Hook. (Text-fig. 13), have the same form asnbsp;those of Thyrsopteris; the two-lipped indusium of the former isnbsp;a point of difference which may be easily overlooked. It isnbsp;interesting to note the striking difference between the sterile pinnaenbsp;of the Bicksonia shown in Text-fig. 13 and the Sphenopteroidnbsp;pinnffi of Thyrsopteris and Coniopteris hymenophylloides. There cannbsp;be little doubt that Thyrsopteris elegans maj� he regarded as an oldnbsp;type of fern which was widely distributed in Mesozoic times.

Among other recent ferns which bear a strong likeness to Coniopteris hymenophylloides we may mention Bicksonia arhorescens,nbsp;L�H�r., and Balantium culcita (L�H�r.); also some species ofnbsp;Bavallia, e.g., Bavallia canwriensis, Sm., B. Wilfordii, Baker, etc.nbsp;As illustrating a variation in the fonn of the fronds in the samenbsp;�plant, even greater than that in Coniopteris h

' For figures of this fern vide Engler amp; Prantl (99), p. 122; Hooker (42), jpl. xliv. A.

reference may be made to a figure of Asplenium multUineatum, Hk.^ given by Eeinecke in a recent volume of Engler�s Jahrb�eher}

An English specimen in the Lund Geological Museum, labelled by Nathorst Sphenopteris soarlroensis, bears a very close resemblancenbsp;to Coniopteris hymenophylloides, and may be identical with thatnbsp;species. C. hymenophylloides is represented by numerous specimensnbsp;in all collections of Yorkshire Jurassic plants.

Several pieces of pinnaj with deeply dissected pinnules, varying in size from the small and narrow form shown in Fig. 4 to the�nbsp;broader deltoid shape of Pig. 5. The venation is very clearlynbsp;shown in some of the pinnules. These fragments appear to menbsp;identical with Brongniart�s Sphenopteris hymenophylloides, the onlynbsp;difierence being that in the fragment of the lower part of the pinnanbsp;of Pig. 5 the segments arc rather broader than in Brongniart�snbsp;specimen. The pinna, of which a part only is drawn in Pig. 5,,nbsp;is 8 cm. in length, the uppermost pinnules being of the formnbsp;illustrated in Fig. 4. The type-specimen of Sphenopteris arguta,nbsp;L. amp; H., agrees exactly with the examples represented innbsp;Pigs. 4 and 5; similarly, I regard the smaller pinnai of the frondnbsp;shown in Fig. 1, PI. XX. as identical with the present specimen.nbsp;This leads to a comparison with Hecr�s species Thyrsopterisnbsp;Maahiana, from the Jurassic beds of Siberia,* a type whichnbsp;I believe to be identical with such English specimens as 52,568nbsp;(PI. XYI. Pigs. 4 and 5), the Whitby frond shown in PI. XX.nbsp;Pig. 1, 40,467 (PI. XVII. Fig. 3), and others.

The chief difference between this pinna and those of specimen 52,568 (PI. XVI. Pigs. 4 and 5) is in the more rounded form ofnbsp;the lobes of the segments, as shown in Pig. 6, PI. XVI. This typenbsp;of pinna is identical with those in some of the specimens referrednbsp;by Brongniart to Coniopteris Murrayana, especially as drawn innbsp;his pi. exxvi. fig. 3.* The example figured in Phillips� third

edition of the Geology of the Yorkshire Coast as Sphenopteris affinis is probably specifically identical with that shown in our Fig. 6.

The important point to decide is the specific identity of the fronds with pinnules like those of Fig. 6�with more or lessnbsp;rounded or sometimes truncate lobes � and the rather longernbsp;segments with acutely dentate lobes as represented in Figs. 4 and 5.nbsp;My belief is that these two forms cannot be specifically separated;nbsp;both pinnae have the same linear form, the pinnules agree in texturenbsp;and in venation, and one often finds that some of the pinnulesnbsp;on such specimens as that of Fig. 6 exhibit a tendency towardsnbsp;sharply pointed denticulations on the edges of the lobes like thosenbsp;in Figs. 4 and 5. There are other reasons which lead to thenbsp;same conclusion, but these are stated in detail in the descriptionsnbsp;of the specimens shown in Plates XX. and XXI. Of. 52,597nbsp;(PI. XXI. Fig. 2).

These fragments illustrate the association of sterile pinnules like those in 52,568 (PI. XVI. Figs. 4 and 5) with fertile segmentsnbsp;in which the lamina is considerably reduced and the tips of thenbsp;narrow lobes bear prominent soi�i. The fertile portion of a pinnanbsp;shown in Fig. 6 is no doubt specifically identical with Tympano-phora raoemosa of Lindley amp; Hutton, and with the fertile pinnanbsp;attributed by Leckenby to Sphenopteris Murray ana �, the sterilenbsp;pointed segments are identical with those represented in PI. XVI.nbsp;Figs. 4 and 5, and these, as already pointed out, I regard asnbsp;indistinguishable from S. arguta, L. amp; H., and 8. hymenopjiylloides,nbsp;Brongn., as also from those of the specimens illustrated asnbsp;8. Murrayana in fig. 3, pi. exxvi. of Brongniart�s Histoire.

Bunbury�s species, 8. nephrocarpa, the type of which is in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge, agrees with the fertile fragmentnbsp;shown in PI. XVII. Fig. 6, and does not, I believe, representnbsp;a distinct species. Cf. also Dicksonia clavipes, as figured by Hoer,,nbsp;from Siberia.¹

Tympanopliora racemosa. Tlie lower pinnules, at the upper end of the drawing, are subdivided into five narrow lobes terminatingnbsp;in compressed cup-shaped indusia, in which some of the individualnbsp;sporangia can he indistinctly recognized. The lamina of thenbsp;fertile segments is rather further reduced than in 52,595 (Fig. 6).nbsp;Portions of sterile pinnules of the S. hymenophylloides type arenbsp;associated with this fertile pinna. Cf. Thyrsopteris Murray ana asnbsp;figured by Eaoihorshi. The fertile segments present a strikingnbsp;agreement with those of the recent fern Bichsonia Bertervana, Hk.,nbsp;shown in Text-fig. 13.

The pinna shown in Fig. 3 is drawn from a bipinnate frond with long acuminate pinnse, bearing obliquely placed, narrow-pointednbsp;segments of the same form as those of Brongniart�s Splienopterisnbsp;hymenophylloides and 52,595 (PI. XVI. Figs. 6 and 7), butnbsp;of smaller dimensions. This specimen appears to he specificallynbsp;identical with Heer�s Siberian examples of Thyrsopteris Maakiana,nbsp;Heer, and with the Whitby specimen shown in PI. XX. Fig. 1 ;nbsp;it affords a good example of the smaller type of frond of the samenbsp;habit as the larger and more abundant specimens of S. hymenophylloides. A specimen, identical with this, in the Leckenhynbsp;Collection is labelled by Xathorst Thyrsopteris Maakiana, Heer.

PI. XX. Figs. 1 and 2. Xo. 2373, Whitby Museum ; labelled Splienopteris dissocialis, Phill.

This is an important specimen as affording evidence of the specific identity of the fronds with shorter pinnules and more rounded ornbsp;truncate divisions, and those of the form represented in Brongniart�snbsp;figure of S. hymenophylloides. It affords additional evidence, innbsp;fact, in favour of regarding such pinnm as those shown in PI. XVI.nbsp;Fig. 6 and PI. XXI. Fig. 2 as identical with the type shown innbsp;PI. XVI. Figs. 4 and 5 and PI. XXI. Figs. 1 and 4. The twonbsp;fronds, portions of which are drawn in Figs. 1 and 2, PI. XX.,nbsp;occur close to one another on the same piece of rock, and fragmentsnbsp;of pinnse with shorter and more rounded segments, and othersnbsp;with the more pointed segments, occur indiscriminately associatednbsp;together. There is also one fertile pinna like that of Figs. 6 and 8,

PI. XVII. The apices of the pimiee shown in Pig. 1 are identical with those of Pig. 2, and the less deeply out and rather broadernbsp;pinnules in Pig. 2 are connected with the more deeply cutnbsp;segments of Pig. 1 by transitional forms met with here and there.nbsp;I have no hesitation in regarding the fronds of Figs. I and 2 asnbsp;those of one plant, or at least of one species. That shown innbsp;Pig. 1 is identical with Heer�s Thyrsopteris MaaMana, but it isnbsp;connected, by slightly larger forms, with S. hymenopliylloides,nbsp;Brongn., and with S. arguta, L. amp; H.; the frond of Fig. 2nbsp;agrees exactly with some of the published figures of S. Murrayana,nbsp;S. affinis, PhilL, and other �species.� The difference betweennbsp;Pigs. 1 and 2 is far less than one finds between fronds on thenbsp;same plant of several recent ferns.

This specimen illustrates a further point confirmatory of the specific identity of the fronds with shai-per and longer pinnulesnbsp;with those bearing the more rounded and shorter segments. In thisnbsp;pinna the segments are of the former type, as in S. hymenophylloides,nbsp;Brongn. ; but at the ba.se of the pinna the two lowest pinnulesnbsp;are curiously modified and have a form suggestive of an Aphlelia-type of lamina, the lamina being much more deeply cleft andnbsp;the narrow linear divisions much longer and more spreading.nbsp;Exactly similar Aplilebia-Yike segments are met with on pinna?nbsp;bearing the shorter and more rounded pinnules.

This pinna is of the same type as those shown in PI. XVI. Fig. 6 and in PI. XX. Pig. 2. The lowest pinnule on the left-hand side exhibits a long branched segment like the ApldeManbsp;form in the preceding specimen (PI. XXI. Fig. 1).

Ibid. pi. Ivi. Cf. also AlloiopteHs quercifolia (Goepp.), as figured by Potoni� (99), p. 139.

The specimen represented in Fig. 3 is shown about twice natural size ; the pinna measures 2�7 cm. in length. Some of the fertilenbsp;segments are exactly like those of PI. XVII. Figs. 6 and 8, andnbsp;identical with Tympanophora racemosa, L. amp; H.; the upper fertilenbsp;segments, which are more reduced and have only one large cupshaped sorus, subtended in some cases by a short bract-like sterilenbsp;lobe, agree with the form referred to Tympanophora simplex.nbsp;Another feature of interest is the same long and narrow divisionnbsp;depending from the lowest pinnule as in the specimen shown innbsp;Figs. 1 and 2.

Fig. 3� shows a single enlarged sorus with indications of sporangia. Cf. Thyrsopteris Murrayana as figured by Heer.

Part of fertile pinna, drawn twice natural size. The chief interest of this fragment is that the pinnules are only partiallynbsp;fertile; instead of a much reduced fertile segment with little ornbsp;no lamina, we have pinnules of the ordinary sterile form bearingnbsp;one or two marginal sori. The lowest pinnules have the samenbsp;Aphlehia-liks appearance�more obvious than shown in the figurenbsp;�as in Figs. 1, 2, and 3.

Fragments of pinnm of the form illustrated in both Figs. 1 and 2 of PL XX. occur in close association with that of Fig. 4, PI. XXI.nbsp;The manner of occurrence of a sorus is more clearly shown innbsp;Fig. 4a.

V. 3289. Several detached pinnae on an iron-stained sandstone; these furnish examples of both the more rounded and the morenbsp;pointed pinnules, and may be matched equally well with thenbsp;pinnae represented in Figs. 4 and 5, and with that shown in Fig. 6.

V. 3680 and V. 3681. Pinnae with pinnules varying much in size, some being as large as those of Fig. 5, PI. XVI. (52,568) andnbsp;others like the lower branches of the frond represented in PI. XX.nbsp;Fig. 1. Such examples as this serve to connect Thyrsopterisnbsp;Maakiana, Heer, on the one hand, and Sphenopteris hymenophylloides,nbsp;Brongn., S. arguta, L. amp; H., on the other.

13,498. A long pinna with some unusually large pinnules of the type of Kg. 5, PL XVI.

39,243. Labelled by Bean Pecopteris Murrayana ; the specimen consists of a rachis bearing long, acuminately tapering, linearnbsp;pinnae, with large pinnules intermediate in shape between thenbsp;shorter and more rounded and the longer and more pointed type.

39,265. Part of a fertile pinna with pinnules identical with the type - specimen of Bunbury�s Sphenopteris nephrocarpa, thenbsp;lamina being rather less reduced than in such a form as thatnbsp;of Pig. 8, PI. XVII.

39,269. An imperfect specimen labelled by Bean Tympanophora simplex, and no doubt identical with the form figured by Bindleynbsp;and Hutton and by Phillips. The axis of the partially preservednbsp;pinna bears segments reduced to a single sorus, accompanied innbsp;some cases by a short sterile lobe, exactly as in the slightlynbsp;smaller example shown in PL XXI. Fig. 3. The best specimennbsp;of T. simplex is in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge. Thisnbsp;shows part of a rachis with fertile pinnse bearing pinnules withnbsp;single cup-shaped son; some of the pinnules, however, bear twonbsp;or more sori, as in PL XXI. Fig. 3. In the typical T. simplexnbsp;fragments the single sori are larger than the sori which are bornenbsp;two, three, four, or five together on the same pinnule, and asnbsp;a rule the single sorus is accompanied by a narrow sterile

40,467a. An indistinct impression on sandstone, illustrating the occurrence of a few fertile pinnules of the Tympanophoranbsp;racemosa type with the small sterile pinnules � like those innbsp;Fig. 1, PL XX.�of the Thyrsopteris Maakiana type.

52,545. Part of a fertile frond, in which the lamina of the segments is considerably reduced, but not quite so much as in thenbsp;specimen shown in Fig. 8, PL XVII.

V. 3293, V, 3305, V. 3673, 13,490, 39,268, 39;276, 40,469 (the same form of frond as that from which Pig. 3, PI. XVII. isnbsp;drawn), 40,516, 48,733, 52,597rt.

2. Coniopteris quinqueloba (Phillips).

Prond tripinnate, of similar habit to that of the preceding species, hut the pinnules are of smaller size and characterized hynbsp;the narrow linear form of the ultimate segments. The sori andnbsp;sporangia appear to be of the Cyatheaceons typo.

�Prond bipinnate; pinna; long, narrow, with a slightly flexuous-axis; pinnules separate, petiolato, 5-lobed, changing to 3-lobed towards the apex of the pinna.�

The specimens on which this diagnosis was founded were obtained from Haiburn liVyke and Staintondale cliffs. Anothernbsp;species, described by Phillips as Sphenopteris arhuscula, also agreesnbsp;closely with the specimens I have included under Coniopterisnbsp;quinqueloba. This species is described as a tripinnate frond,,nbsp;with the pinnules �entirely pinnatifid, the lobes decomposednbsp;into petiolate quinquepartite leaflets, set on a flexuous axis.�nbsp;A smaller specimen is spoken of by Phillips as S. arbuscula, var.;nbsp;this, I believe, is probably identical with S. quinqueloba: twO'nbsp;figures are given of this variety, one of which represents thenbsp;�extremity of a pinna with only the principal veins preserved,�nbsp;exactly as in the accompanying enlarged drawing (Text-fig. 14)nbsp;of a specimen in the Manchester Museum.

In all probability S. arbuscula, var., and S. quinqueloba are specifically identical, while S. arbuscula may, perhaps, be referred,nbsp;to S. Murrayana (cf. PI. XXI. Pig. 5).

In the volume of illustrations originally drawn for Lindley amp; Hutton and published hy Lehour in 1877, a specimen is representednbsp;in plate xxxviii. which is no doubt identical with S. quinquelola;nbsp;it is described as S. quinquelola, var. arhmcula. Williamson, innbsp;writing to Lindley in 1837, describes this example as � one of thenbsp;most elegant little ferns I have jmt seen on the Yorkshire coast.�

The habit of the plant referred to /S. quinquelola is rather more open, and the general appearance of the deeply dividednbsp;pinnules more delicate, than in the smaller forms of Coniopterisnbsp;hymenophylloicles ; but the two species are undoubtedly closely

connected. The fragment shown in Pig. 8, PI. XVI. illustrates the character of the sterile pinna;, while the specimen�shownnbsp;in Text-flg. 14, drawn twice natural size�affords an examplenbsp;of frond fragments identical with that figured by Phillips asnbsp;S. arluscula, var., and in which he considers the lamina hasnbsp;been destroyed. It is a question whether this skeleton form ofnbsp;a pinna represents the fertile leaf or a partially macerated frondnbsp;in which only the veins have been left. We know that partiallynbsp;decayed fronds may assume this appearance, but it is notnbsp;improbable that in this ease we have the normal type of fertilenbsp;pinna. Professor Xathorst, of Stockholm, generously lent me

a small specimen and drawing of a similar skeleton-like pinna, represented in Text-fig. 15, in which some of the ultimate linearnbsp;segments terminate in cup-shaped indusia containing numerousnbsp;sporangia apparently of the Cyatheaceons type, as shown in thenbsp;figure. This example favours the view that Fig. 14 representsnbsp;fertile pinnse, in which the sori are not preserved, rather thannbsp;a macerated portion of a frond of the type represented in PI. XVI.nbsp;Fig. 8. There is little douht that Sphenopteris quinquelohanbsp;should he placed in the genus Coniopteris as a very near ally ofnbsp;G. Tiymenophylloiies, both ferns being members of the Cyatheaceae.nbsp;Xathorst�s specimen exhibits in a more delicate form the

TympanopJiora racemosa type of pinna of G. hymenophylloides. Some of the specimens figured by Saporta from the Lowernbsp;Corallian beds of France as Staehypteris litopliylla^ may possiblynbsp;be identical with the English species.

Numerous fragments of pinnae with small deeply lobed pinnules; the secondary pinnae are given off at a wide angle from thenbsp;secondary rachis. Labelled by Bean Pecopteris athyroides.

These two portions of fronds have been drawn from a specimen in Manchester Mnseum. They agree with the fragment figurednbsp;by Phillips as S. arluseula, var. A few portions of sterile pinnaenbsp;which occur on the same piece of rock probably belong to thisnbsp;species.

Other specimensV. 3291 (similar to the Manchester specimen shown in Text-fig. 14), V. 3678, 10,317, 39,267 (cf. Text-fig. 15),nbsp;52,568 (this is similar to the fronds named by Heer Thjrsopterisnbsp;Maahiana and the example of Coniopteris hymenophylloides represented in PI. XX. Pig. 1; but the pinnules are farther apart,nbsp;and the general habit of the frond is more open).

3. Coniopteris arguta (Lindley amp; Hutton).

1834. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Neuropteris afguta^ Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor, pi. cv.

1864. Pecopteris acutifoUa, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 76. Sphenopteris serrata, ibid.

1875. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fecopteris Lindleyana, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 209, lign. 22.

Frond tripinnatc. Finn� linear and tapering, given off from the rachis at a wide angle; on the lower pinn� the linear pinnulesnbsp;have a crennlated margin and reach a length of 1-2 cm. Thenbsp;smaller pinnules are entire and slightly falcate. The fertilenbsp;pinnules differ in a marked degree from the sterile segments ;nbsp;each fertile pinnule consists of a midrib with a narrow laminarnbsp;border tapering towards the apex, where it hears a circularnbsp;cup-like indusium 1 mm. in diameter, with a central receptaclenbsp;to which the sporangia were attached.

The drawing by the late Professor Williamson in the Fossil Flora of Lindley amp; Hutton illustrates the difference between thenbsp;comparatively long and straight pinnules home on the lowernbsp;pinn�, and the small, acutely pointed, and curved pinnules innbsp;the upper part of the frond. The ferns named by Lindley amp;nbsp;Hutton Fecopteris acutifolia and Sphenopteris serrata, I believenbsp;to he specifically identical with their species Neuropteris arguta.nbsp;There is a fairly close resemblance between the pinn� ofnbsp;Coniopteris arguta, bearing small pinnules, and the pinn� of Kluhianbsp;exilis, but in the former species the pinnules arc more acutelynbsp;pointed and attached moi�o obliquely to the pinna axis.

The name Fecopteris Lindleyana was applied by Prcsl in 1838 to a plant which he regarded as identical with Neuropteris argutanbsp;of Lindley amp; Hutton; Hoyle also described a fern from Indianbsp;under the name Fecopteris Lindleyana, specifically distinct fromnbsp;Presl�s species.'

Presl�s specific name is adopted by Phillips, who figures a specimen in which fertile and sterile pinnules arc shown on thenbsp;same pinna; the original of Phillips� figure is in the Leckenbynbsp;Collection, Cambridge. In the absence of the characteristic fertilenbsp;segments, it is practically impossible in some cases to determinenbsp;the species of ferns of the Cladophlehis type bearing small

' Foyle (39), pi. ii. (Foyle�s type-specimen is in the Geological Department of the British Museum.)

linear pinnules. The quot;Wealden ferns described under the names C. Browniana (Dunk.) and C. Dunlceri (Schimp.)' are of thisnbsp;type, also the specimens described by Yokoyama^ from Japan asnbsp;Pecopteris exilis and the specimen from Steierdorf named bynbsp;-kndrae Cyatlieites decurrens?

The form of the fertile segments, especially the cup - shaped indusium, leads me to include Coniopteris argwla in the Cyatheaoeae.nbsp;In Text-fig. 16 the fertile segments are clearly shown, twicenbsp;natural size; they suggest a comparison with TJiyrsopteris andnbsp;other members of the Cyatheacese, and arc somewhat similar tonbsp;those of Nephrolepii dwvallioides, Swartz.' The single fertilenbsp;segment, enlarged four times, shows the single Thyrsopteris-\\k.Qnbsp;indusium with the small central umbo or receptacle.

39,232. PI. XVn. rigs. 4 and 5.

This specimen, of which a portion is represented in Pit,quot; 4, shows parts of nine pinna? attached to the rachis ; the lonoOsnbsp;of which measures about 9 cm. The larger pinnules (Pig- amp;)

straight and slightly lohed ; those nearer the distal end of the-pinnae are entire, more inclined to the pinna axis, and more acutely pointed.

This specimen serves as an example illustrating the close agreement between portions of a frond of Coniopteris arguta andnbsp;Eluhia exilis. Cf. the drawing of Pecopteris acutifolia given bynbsp;Lindley amp; Hutton {^Fossil Flora, pi. clvii.).

Portions of two of the best fertile pinnae are shown in the drawing. The fertile segments are about 4 mm. in length, andnbsp;the indusial cup, with a small central receptacle, has a diameternbsp;of 1 mm, Cf. Aspleniopteris pinnatifida, Pont.'

39,255. Labelled by Bean Feuropteris arguta. This example is probably part of a large pinna ; it agrees closely with thenbsp;specimen figured by Lindley amp; Hutton as Sphenopteris serrata,nbsp;and forms a connecting link between the fronds with smallernbsp;pinnules and those with larger ultimate segments.

Other specimens;�V. 2632, V. 3932, V. 3941, 13,487, 13,493,, 39,232, 39,260, 40,467.

This family name is employed to indicate the probable close-relationship between the recent genus Bipteris and such fossil genera as Dictyophyllum and Protorhipis, and to give expression tonbsp;the deviation of these ferns from the typical Polypodiaoese.

The genus Bictyophjllum was founded by Lindley amp; Hutton as a designation for a pinnatifid leaf from the Yorkshire Oolite,nbsp;which they regarded as a doubtful Dicotyledon and namednbsp;Bictyophyllum rugosum. Plants agreeing closely with this speciesnbsp;have been placed by different authors in several genera, ofnbsp;which the distinguishing characteristics are by no means clear.nbsp;We have, for example, the genera Clathropteris, Thaumatopteris,nbsp;Camptopteris, Hausmannia, and Protorhipis applied to palmatenbsp;fern fronds of Mesozoic age, which agree in many respectsnbsp;with Pietyophyllum and with one another. The use of thesenbsp;different names has not only led to much confusion, but hasnbsp;also considerably exaggerated the diversity which exists amongnbsp;the ferns referred to under the several genera.

Goppert�s genus Thaumatopteris has been wisely included by �Schenk and some other writers in Piety ophyllum;' the examinationnbsp;of several specimens referred to these genera in the Museumsnbsp;of Berlin and elsewhere has convinced me that there are nonbsp;satisfactory grounds for retaining both generic names.

The genus Clathropteris was instituted by Brongniart in 1828 � for a plant which he had previously described from Scania undernbsp;the name Filicites meniscoides; ^ the most striking characteristicsnbsp;of this fern arc its pinnatifid fronds and the regular square meshesnbsp;formed by the finer veins in the lamina. The best known speciesnbsp;of this genus is Clathropteris platyphylla (G�pp.),� of Ehartic age,nbsp;the same type which Brongniart had described as Clathropterisnbsp;meniscoides. The main distinction between Clathropteris andnbsp;Pictyophyllum is the more regular and rectangular form of thenbsp;meshes formed by the secondary and tertiary veins of the former,nbsp;but in some fronds * portions of the lamina exhibit the less regularnbsp;meshes characteristic of Pietophyllum. It would perhaps more

accurately express the affinity of the plants referred to these genera if they were regarded as generically identical, hut it may honbsp;more convenient to retain the genus ClatJiropteris, as representingnbsp;a fairly well defined type.

Presl instituted the genus Camptopteris ¹ ² for certain ferns named hy Brongniart Phlebopteris. The figure given by Presl of hisnbsp;type-specimen, C. Muensterima � a plant subsequently referrednbsp;to the species Clathropteris platyphylla�represents a small piecenbsp;of frond with the venation characters of Brongniart�s genusnbsp;Clathropteris.

Another plant, named by Brongniart Phlebopteris Nilssoni, and included by Presl in his genus Camptopteris, should undoubtedlynbsp;be referred to Bietyophyllwm. While there are, I believe, nonbsp;good reasons for retaining Presl�s genus as originally applied,nbsp;it may be convenient to retain it in the modified sense in whichnbsp;Nathorst has applied it to some remarkable specimens of Phseticnbsp;age from Scania.- A restoration published by Nathorst ofnbsp;Camptopteris spiralis, Nath., in his Geology of Sweden,^ admirablynbsp;illustrates the habit of the genus. Having had an opportunitynbsp;of examining the Scanian fossils in the Stockholm Museum, I cannbsp;bear testimony to the accuracy of Hathorst�s restoration. It isnbsp;probable that a specimen recently figured by Zeillor² as thenbsp;base of a Clathropteris frond should be referred to the genusnbsp;Camptopteris as used by Hathorst.�

Dunker�s genus Ilausmannia was instituted in 1846� for an imperfect leaf from the North German Wealden. The type-specimen, S. dichotoma, has a palmate frond, deeply divided intonbsp;lobed linear segments traversed by forked main veins from whichnbsp;anastomosing branchlets are given ofi. The typo-specimen of

� Since this wa.a written, M. Zeiller, of Paris, has published an excellent work �on Palaiobotany [�l�maits de Fal�obotanique), in which he figures an unusuallynbsp;perfect specimen of Clathropteris platyphylla, Gopp., from Tonquin; this isnbsp;by far the finest example so far described of a Mesozoic species which presentsnbsp;a striking resemblance to some forms of the recent genus Dipteris, and in habitnbsp;agrees also with Jlatonia pectinata and Cheiropteris pabnatopedata (Bak.).

Andrae�s genus Protorhipis was described in 1853 � from the -Jurassic rooks of Steierdorf under the name Protorhipis Buch�:nbsp;this differs from Hausmminia dichotoma of Dimker in havingnbsp;a broader suborbicular leaf with an irregularly dontated margin.nbsp;Some fossils figured by Bartholin from Bornholm as Hausmannianbsp;Forchhammeri'^ are in part apparently identical with Andrao�snbsp;Protorhipis Buchii, while others agree equally well with Bunker�snbsp;Wealdcn type. Zeiller has recently pointed out that Bartholin�snbsp;specimens should bo referred to Protorhipis,'^ and it seems clearnbsp;that Andrae�s genus should include fronds of the Hammamiianbsp;diehotoma type. As Zeiller has demonstrated by photographsnbsp;and several good examples of Steierdorf specimens, the genusnbsp;Protorhipis agrees remarkably closely with the recent genusnbsp;Bipteris, to which it is undoubtedly very nearly related. It isnbsp;convenient to retain the name Protorhipis for certain species ofnbsp;Wealden and Jurassic ferns which agree in the form of thenbsp;fi'ond with Bipteris, and are somewhat smaller than the typicalnbsp;Bictyophylliirn fronds. While it is not difficult to distinguishnbsp;between Bictyophyllum and Protorhipis in the case of goodnbsp;specimens, it is practically impossible to do so if we have onlynbsp;fragments of fronds.

If we retain Camptopteris in Hathorst�s sense, the only other generic names of those we have mentioned which should benbsp;retained are, in my opinion, Bictyophyllum, Protorhipis, andnbsp;possibly Clathropteris.

As Brongniart^ long ago noticed, there is a striking similarity between the fronds of some species of Poly podium�referred tonbsp;a special subgenus Brynaria�and the leaves of Bictyophyllum ;nbsp;this resemblance, however, does not extend to the habit of thenbsp;frond as a whole. As regards the shape of the frond, there isnbsp;a still closer resemblance between Bipteris and Bictyophyllum, andnbsp;a still more striking similarity between Bipteris and Protorhipis.

Dictyophyllum rugosum, Lindley amp; Hutton.

1828. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;JPhlebopteris PhilKpsii, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 377, pl. cxxxii..

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Phyllites nermlosis, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pl. viii. fig. 9.

1834. Dictyophyllum ruyosum, Bindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. ii. pl. civ^ 1836. Polypodites heracleifolius, G�ppert, Foss. Farm. p. 344.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Polypodites heracleifolius, Unger, Gen. spec. foss. plant. p. 167.

1864. Dictyophxjllum rugosum, Leckenby, Quart. Joiu'u. Geol. Soo. vol. xx., p. 76.

1898. Cf. Dictophyllum bremerense, Shirley, Foss. Flor. Queensland, pl. xiii.. fig. 2.

Frond large, palmate pedate, deeply dissected into broadly linear pinnatifid lobes with linear acuminate ultimate segments. Eachnbsp;lobe is traversed by a short midrib giving off alternate lateral veins,nbsp;each of which forms the main vein of an ultimate segment; fromnbsp;each of the main veins smaller veins arc given off approximately atnbsp;right angles, and those anastomose and form a system of irregularnbsp;meshes occupied by the fine ramifications of the vascular bundles..nbsp;[Xo good examples of sori have been met with in specimens of

Bictyophyllum ruyosum, but in other species the sporangia are described as having a complete vertical or oblique annulus andnbsp;tetrahedral spores.']

In 1828 Brongniart proposed the name Phhhopteris PMlUpsi for the plant figured by Bindley amp; Hutton in 1834 as Bictyophyllumnbsp;ruyosum; the latter name is quoted by the French author asnbsp;a synonym, although the plant Tvas not described in the Possilnbsp;Flora until 1834. We must assume, therefore, that Brongniartnbsp;saw the description by the English authors some years beforenbsp;Bindley amp; Hutton published their work. The name Bictyopliylluynnbsp;rugosum has been usually accepted, and, apart from the questionnbsp;of strict priority, it is adopted as the better known and morenbsp;convenient designation. In a later work, Brongniart^ expressednbsp;the opinion that the English species should probably be referrednbsp;to Presl�s genus Camptopteris.

In 1856 Zigno instituted a new specific name, Bictyophyllum� Lechenbyi, for a Bictyophyllum frond from the Yorkshire coast,nbsp;with deeply pinuatifid pinnse having long and narrow ultimatenbsp;segments, which he regarded as distinct from B. rugosum. Thenbsp;difference between such a leaf as that shown in pi. xxiii. of Zigno�snbsp;work and Williamson�s drawing published by Bindley amp; Hutton,,nbsp;consists chiefly in the longer and narrower segments of the former,,nbsp;but the existence of transitional forms affords ample evidencenbsp;of the specific identity of the two forms. In 1878 Yathoi�st�nbsp;discussed at some length the genus Bictyophyllum, and quotednbsp;the species as characterized by very variable leaves and asnbsp;illustrating the diflculty of distinguishing between species andnbsp;varieties.

The relationship of Bictyophyllum rugosum with recent ferns is of considerable interest. The genus Bictyophyllum has beennbsp;quoted as a leptosporangiate fern agreeing in certain charactersnbsp;with both the Gleichcniacem and Cyatheacese,* and in that respectnbsp;comparable with Matonidium and Laccoptcris. Some of the morenbsp;perfect specimens of Bictyophyllum certainly suggest a comparison.

as regards the form of the frond, with Matonia pectinata, R. Br., hut the soral characters and the form of the leaf point rathernbsp;to a comparison with the genus Bipteris. Bipteris * is a tropicalnbsp;Indo-Malay type represented at the present day by a few species,nbsp;which have usually been placed among the Polypodiaccse, but thenbsp;sporangia do not appear to be typically polypodiaceous, and thenbsp;genus is clearly an isolated type of somewhat uncertain position.nbsp;Raciborski has suggested the new family term Protopolypodiacesenbsp;for the reception of a fertile Bictyophylluni leaf characterized bynbsp;naked sori, consisting of a few sporangia with an oblique annulus,nbsp;characters which are found also in the recent species of Bipteris.nbsp;It is proposed to discuss more fully elsewhere the systematicnbsp;position of the recent genus, but such evidence as we at presentnbsp;possess favours the view that Bictyophylluni and Protorhipis arenbsp;closely related to Bipteris, and constitute Mesozoic members ofnbsp;a group of ferns now barely represented, but in former timesnbsp;widely distributed. It may be convenient to emphasize thenbsp;affinity of Bictyophylluni with Bipteris, and the isolated positionnbsp;of both these genera and Protorhipis, by placing them provisionallynbsp;in a separate family, which we may designate the Dipteridinae,nbsp;using in a wider sense a term already employed with a morenbsp;restricted meaning.

Portions of two pinnae which arc so placed as to suggest their proximity to a common rachis towards which they are converging.nbsp;The whole frond probably had a habit similar to that of Matonianbsp;pectinata, Cheiropteris, Laccopteris, and other genera. The singlenbsp;segment represented in the figure is given off practically at rightnbsp;angles from the axis of the pinna, and represents a portion ofnbsp;a long and narrow segment with irregularly dentate or undulating-margins, similar to the form of leaf named bj^ Zigno Bictyophyllumnbsp;Lechenhyi. The venation characters are fairly well shown in thenbsp;figured specimen. Labelled Phlelopteris Phillipsii in Bean�s MS.

' Engler amp; PrantI (99), p. 202, fig. 108. Vide also Beddome (66), pi. Ixxx. ^ llaciborski (91), p. 8. Vide also Potoni� (99), p. 86.

A good specimen representing the apical portion of a pinna; at the apex the pinna is strongly dentate, and the pointed entirenbsp;segments become rapidly longer towards the lower part of thenbsp;leaf, which may he described as pinnatisect with linear taperingnbsp;segments. The whole specimen has a length of 17-5 cm., but thenbsp;lowest part is not shown in the figure. Prominent lateral veinsnbsp;are given off from the central axis of the pinna, and from thesenbsp;arise smaller anastomosing veins.

The segment shown in Fig. 3, PI. XIII. is, in all probability, specifically identical with the present specimen, and belongs to thenbsp;lower part of a deeply dissected pinna, of which Fig. 1, PI. XVIII.nbsp;represents the apical portion.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;BecMes Coll.

This unusually good specimen from the Whitby Collection is no doubt the one referred to by Xathorst' in his notes on the Jurassicnbsp;Flora of England; ho compares it with Clathropteris platyphylla,nbsp;Brongn., and adopts the name C. mhithiensis, which Brongniartnbsp;suggested, hut never published, for the Whitby specimen.

A comparison of specimen V. 2724 (PI. XVIII. Fig. 1) with Text-fig. 17 at once brings out the close agreement between onenbsp;of the dentate divisions of the frond shown in the figure and thenbsp;portions of a pinna represented in Fig. 1, PL XVIII. The Whitbynbsp;specimen is an example of a comparatively small frond clearlynbsp;illustrating the characteristic method of branching of the mainnbsp;veins, which agrees with that in the recent genus Bipteris. Thenbsp;commoner specimens of Bictyophyllum are merely portions of pinna;nbsp;or the ultimate segments of pinna;.

The spotted appearance shown in Fig. 17 is due to the presence of small patches of carbon; no definite trace of sporangia can benbsp;detected.

An imperfectly preserved frond similar to the Whitby specimen (Fig. 17), hut without the lower portion of the leaf where thenbsp;several pinnae converge into a common lamina traversed by radiating

main ribs. Both the specimens (Bigs. 17 and 18) represent youngs or at least small, leaves; the examples of the form represented innbsp;Bl. XIII. Fig. 3 belong to much larger leaves.

This specimen is very similar to that of Fig. 17, but interesting as showing part of the main framework of a frond with indistinctnbsp;traces of the laminar portion, in which the secondary and tertiaiynbsp;veins arc sufiioicntly indicated to enable one to recognize thenbsp;Bictyopliyllum characters. Identified by Fhillips in 1873 asnbsp;Phlehopteris PMllipsi.

V. 2523. Two specimens on the same piece of rook; one of them is from the hasal portion of a frond, and shows three mainnbsp;ribs converging towards a common point, as seen inText-figs.17-19.

The segments of the other specimen have the long and narrow form similar to that of 39,224 (PL XIII. Pig. 3).

13,508. In this example the upper portion of the pinna consists of a narrow lamina with dentate edges, similar to the segmentnbsp;shown in PI. XIII. Pig. 3; in the lower part the pinna bears longnbsp;and narrow segments. Of. V. 2891 (Text-fig. 18).

39,223. A large specimen about 25 cm. in length. In the lower portion the pinnae are deeply pinnatisect; the segments extendnbsp;almost to the rachis, as in pi. civ. of the Fossil Flora of Lindley amp;nbsp;Hutton ; the segments are rather far apart, as in the Pietyophyllumnbsp;Leckenbyi form of frond, and they have a crenulate margin. Thenbsp;longest ultimate segment measures lO'Sem. in length. In the uppernbsp;part of the specimen the segments become gradually shorter, andnbsp;the lamina connecting the bases of the segments is broader thannbsp;in the lower part of the pinna. The margin of the shorter andnbsp;smaller segments in the upper part of the pinna is entire, agreeingnbsp;with those of V. 2724 (PI. XYIII. Pig. 1). A specimen of thisnbsp;form serves to illustrate the identity of Zigno�s B. LecUnbyi withnbsp;B. rugosum of Lindley amp; Hutton. Labelled by Bean Phlehopterisnbsp;Phillipsii, Phyllites nervulosus, and Bictyophyllum rugosum.

Other specimens: � V. 3669 and 10,370 (similar to 39,224; venation clearly shown).

The genus KluMa was instituted by Eaciborski as a substitute for Pecopteris in the species P. exilis, Phill., on the ground thatnbsp;the sporangial characters proved the fern to be a member of thenbsp;Schizseaceee; a new name was, therefore, wisely chosen to marknbsp;a fuller knowledge of botanical affinity than is expressed by thenbsp;form-genus Pecopteris.

Klulda is a genus characterized by the manner of occurrence and structure of the sporangia as well as by the Pecopteris ornbsp;CladopMelis form of the frond; the sporangia possess an apicalnbsp;annulus, and occur singly on either side of the midrib of thenbsp;ultimate segments.

In 1851 Bnnbury* figured a fragment of a fertile pinna of Pecopteris exilis, and drew attention to the agreement betweennbsp;the fossil sporangia and those of the Schizseaoese. Bunbury�snbsp;specimen, which is now in the Cambridge Botanical Museum, hasnbsp;been refigured to show more clearly the structure of the sporangia.�nbsp;Other figures of this species may be found in Raciborski�s papernbsp;already referred to, and in the Monograph of the Cracow Flora bynbsp;the same author.

It is of interest to note that the type of sporangium characteristic of the Schizaeaeese is met with also among Palaeozoic ferns; thenbsp;well-known genus Senftenbergia of Corda� is characterized by thenbsp;possession of sporangia with an apical annulus consisting of twonbsp;rings of thick-walled cells, while the recent species have usuallynbsp;one ring only. In a recent publication Zeiller has shown that innbsp;the sporangia of Lygodium a second ring of thick-walled cells isnbsp;occasionally represented; a fact which connects more closely thenbsp;Palaeozoic type and the recent species.^ A similar example ofnbsp;a recent Lygodium sporangium, with an indication of a doublenbsp;annulus, was figured by Link in 1842.�

Klukia exilis (Phill.).

(PI. XVI. Fig. 7.)

1837. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pecopteris obtitsifolia, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. iii. pi. clviii.

fiff. 1.

* nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Zeiller (97�), pp. 215 and 216. Vide also Bower (99), p. 43.nbsp;� Link (42), pi. iv. fig. 2.

Pecopteris oltusifolia, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, faso. vii. p. 155. Pecopteris exiUs, Bronn, Ind. Pal. p. 915.

Pecopteris exilis, Bunbury, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soo. vol. vii. p. 188. Pecopteris exilis, Morris, Brit. Foss. p. 15.

Pecopteris exilis, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soo. vol. xx. p. 76. Pecopteris exilis, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. i. p. 536.

K. exilis, Baciborski, Flor. Krakow, p. 165, pi. vii. fig. 13; pi. viii. figs. 1-3, 7 (?), 8, and 96; pi. ix. figs. 1 and 2 (?); pi. xxvi.nbsp;fig. 1 (?).

Frond tripinnate, of the Cladophlelis tj^oe ; the pinnee are alternate and linear, lanceolate in form ; attached to the rachisnbsp;at a wide angle. The ultimate segments are short and linear,nbsp;with more or less bluntly rounded apices, seldom exceeding 5 mm.nbsp;in length; the sporangia, which may reach a length of '5 mm.,nbsp;are home singly on the under side of the pinnules, forming a singlenbsp;row on each side of the midrib.

It is difficult to distinguish some of the sterile bipinnate fronds �of this type from the fern described by Lindley amp; Hutton asnbsp;Sphenopteris serrata. Hathorst considers the two forms specificallynbsp;identical, but I believe that the latter fern should be includednbsp;in Neuropteris arguta of Lindley amp; Hutton.

Eaciborski�s figures of the specimens he refers to Kluhia aeutifolia, K. exilis, and K. PMllipai do not afford satisfactorynbsp;evidence of specific difference ; it is probable that the examplesnbsp;so named are all referable to Phillips� species.

There are several good examples of Klulcia exilis in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge, and in the Museums of Manchester, Scarborough, and other places.

40,557. PL XYI. Fig. 7.

A portion of a bipinnate fertile frond ; the narrow linear pinnae are given off from the rachis at a wide angle. The pinnules,

which, are attached to the pinna axis by the whole of the base, have an entire margin and blunt apices. On the under side ofnbsp;the pinnules a row of pits, representing the large single sporangia,nbsp;occurs on each side of the midrib.

V. 3671. A small and imperfect specimen, but of interest as-agreeing very closely with Phillips� figure,� which evidently represents a badly preserved fragment.

V. 3676. Part of a frond in which the pinnules are longer than usual, having a length of 5 mm. and bearing seven sporangianbsp;on each side of the midrib. The apical annulus is clearly shown.

13,496. Portions of two bipinnate pinnoe, which by their manner of occurrence on the shale appear to belong to a tripinnate frond.

39,244. Portions of two bipinnate pinnee, one of which is-attached to the main rachis. The sporangia appear on the upper surface of the pinnules as three to five circular projections onnbsp;each side of the midrib. Labelled by Bean Pecopteris oMusifolia.

The generic name Ruffordia was substituted for the provisional genus Sphenopteris, because the evidence afforded by the richnbsp;AVcalden material seemed to justify the inclusion of Bunker�snbsp;species, Sphenopteris Qoepperti, in the Schizmaccae ; the new namenbsp;was suggested as indicating a less imperfect knowledge of affinitynbsp;than is implied by the generic term Sphenopteris. The genus is

characterized hy a distinct contrast between barren and fertile pinnae, by the resemblance of the pinnules to those of Ammidnbsp;adiantifolia, Sw., and by the correspondence in habit of both thenbsp;sterile and fertile pinnae.

Rufifordia Goepperti (Dunkor).

The synonymy and diagnosis of this species have been given at length in the first volume of my Wealden Catalogue. Leckenhynbsp;was the fiz�st to suggest the identity of the Lower Oolite fern withnbsp;the Wealden species which Ettingshausen named Sphenopterisnbsp;Jugleri. Schenk included SpTienopteris Jugleri, Ett., as a synonymnbsp;of Bunker�s species S. Goepperti, and the Wealden specimens innbsp;the British Museum amply confirm this view. There are nonbsp;examples from the Yorkshire Oolite rocks in the Museum Collectionnbsp;which can be referred to the Wealden type, hut in the Leckenhynbsp;Collection (Camhridge) there are two small specimens (Yos. 144,nbsp;158) which are probably identical with Ruffordia Goepperti. Innbsp;the third edition of Phillips� Geology of Yorkshire there is a figure ^nbsp;of a portion of one of the Leckenhy specimens which does not donbsp;justice to the original, but it serves to illustrate the resemblancenbsp;of the Jurassic fern to the Wealden type.

The list of Inferior Oolite fossils given by Eox-Strangways includes the Wealden species Sphenopteris Jugleri, Ett. Onnbsp;the smaller specimen in the Leckenhy Collection Nathorst hasnbsp;written: �Possibly the young leaf of Sphenopteris WilUamsonis,nbsp;or perhaps the same as 8. Jugleri.quot; The larger specimennbsp;(Bo. 158) bears but little resemblance to Brongniart�s speciesnbsp;8. WilUamsonis.

1. Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.).

[2. Cladophlebis lobifolia (Phillips).

3. Cladophlebis haiburnensis (Bindley amp; Hutton).]

The species Cladophlehis denticulata (Brongn.) is included in the family Polypodiacese on the ground that the fertile pinnulesnbsp;agree fairly closely with those of some recent polypodiaceous ferns,nbsp;but the evidence is insufficient to admit of a positive statementnbsp;as to systematic position. The other two species of the genusnbsp;must still be included among the ferns which do not afford anynbsp;trustworthy evidence as to family affinities.

1. Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongniart).

P. denticulata, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 301, pi. xoviii. figs. 1 and 2.

Phlehopteris^ undans, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 375, pi. cixxiii.. fig. 3.

1833. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;ipeuropteris liejata, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pi. ixix.

Alethopteris insignis, Broun, Ind. Pal. p. 23.

A. denticulata, ibid. p. 23.

Neuropteris ligata, ibid. p. 811.

Alethopteris Fhillipsii, ibid. p. 24.

Folypodites undmis, Brongniart, Tableau, p. 105.

Fecopteris denticulata, ibid.

CladophleUs ligata, ibid.

Fecopteris FhilhpsU, ibid.

Folypodites imdans, Unger, Gen. spec. foss. p. 168.

Aletlioptei'is insignis, ibid. p. 149.

Neuropteris ligata, ibid. p. 86.

Alethopteris Fhillipsii, ibid. p. 148.

Fecopteris insignis. Morris, Brit. Foss. p. 15.

F. denticulata, ibid.

F. ligata, ibid.

F. Fhillipsii, ibid. p. 16.

Folypodites undans, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. rol. i. p.

Fecopteris insignis, ibid. p. 135.

F. denticulata, ibid. p. 129.

F. ligata, ibid. p. 140.

F. Fhillipsii, ibid. p. 139.

^Fecopteris indica, Oldham amp; Morris, Pal. Ind. p. 47, pl. xxvii. Folypodites undans, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 76.nbsp;Fecopteris insignis, ibid.

Neuropteris ? ligata, ibid.

Fecopteris lohitbiensis, ibid. p. 77.

Alethopteris insignis, Eichwald, Letli. Ross. pl. ii. fig. 6, p. 15. Alethopteris insignis, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. i. p. 565.

A. denticulata, ibid. p. 563.

A. Fhillipsii, ibid. p. 564.

Cf. Fecopteris australis, McCoy, Geol. Surv. Tiet. p. 16, pl. xiv. fig. 3. Fhleiopteris undans, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 203, lign. 12.

Fecopteris insignis, ibid. p. 206, lign. 17.

F. denticulata, ibid. p. 206, lign. 18.

F. Fhillipsii, ibid. p. 207, lign. 19.

?Asplenites macrocarpus, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. (77^) p. 171, pl. i. fig. 1; pl. xlviii. fig. 2, etc.

Alethopteris indica, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. (77�) pl. i. flgs. 3-5. Asplenium petruschiniense. Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. v. (�.) pl. i-

flg. 1.

Fteris frigida. Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. vi. p. 27, pl. x. figs. 1-4;

pl. xi.; pl, xii. fig. 2 ; pl. xiii. fig. 2 ; pl. xvi. figs. 1 and 2.

F. longipennis, ibid. pl. x. figs. 11 and 12 ; pl. xiii. fig. 1.

F. ligata, ibid. pl. .xvi. fig. 3.

CladophleUs denticulata, Fontaine, Potomac Flora, p. 71, pi- v�. fig. 7. Cf. Alethopteris australis, Feistmantel, Foss. Flor. Australia, pl. xxvii.nbsp;fig. 3.

Fecopteris undans, Fox-Strangways, Tab. Foss. p. 133.

P. denticulata, ibid. p. 132.

1894. GladophleUs denticulata, Kaciborski, Flor. Krakow, p. 224, pi. xxii. figs. 3 and 4.

1900. GladophleUs denticulata, Seward, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. vol. xliv. p. 18, pi. iv. fig. 9.

Type - specimens. Brongniart�s type - specimens in the Paris Museum. A specimen, which is the counterpart of the type-specimen of Pecopteris insignis of Bindley amp; Hutton, is in thenbsp;Leckenhy Collection, Cambridge (Ho. 342).

Frond hipinnate, large, with long spreading pinnae attached to a comparatively slender raohis. Pinnules falcate, acutely pointed,nbsp;usually finely dentate, attached hy the whole of the base; thenbsp;longest pinnules may reach a length of 3-4 cm. Venation ofnbsp;the typical GladophleUs type; a well-marked midrib giving offnbsp;secondary dichotomously forked veins at an acute angle. Towardsnbsp;the apex of the frond the pinnules are shorter and broader thannbsp;the longer and narrower segments in the lower or middle portionnbsp;of the frond.

Fertile fronds similar in form to the sterile ; the segments of the same shape, but somewhat straighter, and with an irregularlynbsp;serrate margin, the sori are oblong in shape and parallel to thenbsp;secondary veins.

The specimens on which Brongniartfounded his species GladophleUs denticulata are fairly large examples of well-preserved fronds withnbsp;falcate pinnules having an obviously dentate margin; they arcnbsp;of the same form as those represented in PI. XIV. Figs. 3 and 4nbsp;of this Catalogue. Brongniart regards Pecopteris ligata of Phillipsnbsp;and Neuropteris ligata, as figured hy Bindley amp; Hutton, as identicalnbsp;with his P. denticulata. The type-specimens of P. denticulata werenbsp;sent to Paris by 'Williamson and Bean from the neighbourhood ofnbsp;Scarborough (no doubt Gristhorpe Bay).

The frond represented in the Fossil Flora of Bindley amp; Hutton as Neuropteris ligata has falcate dentate pinnules like those innbsp;Brongniart�s specimen, and as shown in PI. XIV. Fig. 3. Xathorst,nbsp;who has examined the type - specimen of Pecopteris ligata of

Phillips in the Oxford Museum, believes it to he a fragment of Laceopteris polypodioides ' (Brongn.), but he regards Neuropterisnbsp;ligata, L. amp; H., as identical with Cladophlebis denticulata} Thenbsp;same author considers that Pecopteris insignis of Bindley amp; Huttonnbsp;is probably the lower part of a frond of P. denticulata, Brongn.nbsp;This view is no doubt correct. The drawing in the Fossil Floranbsp;(pi. cv.) represents the long falcate pinnules as entire, but a closenbsp;inspection of the type-specimen (or rather the counterpart, nownbsp;in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge, No. 342) reveals thenbsp;presence of fine teeth on the more perfectly preserved segments.nbsp;Nathorst has also suggested that the fragments figured by Bindleynbsp;and Hutton and others as Pecopteris or Phlehopteris undans maynbsp;belong to a fertile frond of Cladophlebis denticulata. A carefulnbsp;�comparison of several specimens of P. undans with C. denticulatanbsp;has led me to this conclusion (vide PI. XX. Pigs. 3� and Sh).nbsp;The type-specimen of P. undans of Bindley amp; Hutton (Scarboroughnbsp;Museum) is associated with portions of Cladophlebis denticulata onnbsp;the same piece of shale.

Schimper and some other authors have also considered Neuropteris ligata of Bindley amp; Hutton and Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.)nbsp;identical.

It has already been pointed out, in the description of Todifes Williamsoni, that the specimens described by Brongniart asnbsp;Pecopteris whitbiensis appear to be identical with the formernbsp;species and specifically distinct from the type - specimen ofnbsp;P. whitbiensis as figured by Bindley amp; Hutton. It would benbsp;a hopeless task to attempt an accurate determination of thenbsp;numerous fronds or fragments of pinna) referred by various authorsnbsp;to Pecopteris whitbiensis, Aspleniwm whitbiense, etc., but it is atnbsp;least highly probable that not a few of the fossils thus describednbsp;are specifically identical with Cladophlebis denticulata, Brongn.nbsp;Pern fronds of the type described under such names as Cladophlebisnbsp;whitbiensis, C. Albertsii, Asplenium Roesserti, A. nebbense, etc.,nbsp;have a worldwide distribution in Mesozoic rooks,� and we knownbsp;that leaves of a precisely similar habit are met with in difierent

genera and families of recent ferns; an identification of fossil fragments of this typo without the evidence of fertile pinnae isnbsp;a hopeless tash. All that we can do, is to point out what appearnbsp;to he the most probable cases of identity among the numerousnbsp;examples of fronds of this type in the English Jurassic stratanbsp;and in beds of approximately the same age in other countries.

Zigno includes Pecopteris whitUenais, L. amp; H., as a sj-nonym of P. ligata, Phill. The pinnules as represented in pi. cxxxiv.nbsp;of the Foasil Flora (P. ivhithiemia) have entire margins, but arenbsp;otherwise identical with those of Neuropteris ligata of Lindley amp;nbsp;Hutton. The small portion of a pinna figured in PI. XV. Pig. 5nbsp;of this volume is taken from a fairly large specimen of a frondnbsp;which is labelled by Bean Peeopteria whitbienaia (Xo. 39,240), andnbsp;agrees exactly with the frond illustrated under this name by thenbsp;authors of the Fosail Flora. I believe that P. dentimlata ofnbsp;Brongniart and P. whitbienaia of Lindley amp; Hutton are specificallynbsp;identical.

The specimens figured by Lindley amp; Hutton as Pecopteris dentata have been incorporated under the species Todites Williamsoni, asnbsp;a result of the examination of the type-specimens.

Brongniart�s figure of Pecopteris Phi�lipsii, drawn from a specimen contributed by Williamson from Cayton, near Scarborough, presents,nbsp;a fairly close agreement with some forms of Cladoplilebis denticidata,nbsp;and is clearly identical with the example represented in PI. XX.nbsp;Fig. 4 ; this specimen has been labelled by Bean Pecopterisnbsp;Phillipsii, Brongn. The somewhat narrower form of the pinnulesnbsp;and other slight differences between this form of frond and thenbsp;more typical G. denticulata are, I believe, of no importance; theynbsp;rather suggest that the frond had been exposed to the sun somenbsp;time and slightly contracted or shrivelled before it was embeddednbsp;in the mud.

Enough has been said to indicate the confused state of the synonymy of these Cladophlebis fronds.

Brongniart�s specific name denticulata is adopted as having been published earlier than C. inaignis of Lindley amp; Hutton, andnbsp;as denoting a type of frond of common occurrence in collectionsnbsp;of Yorkshire Oolite plants. To use the specific name whitbienaianbsp;would lead to considerable confusion, as different authors havenbsp;applied this designation to fern fronds belonging to distinct generanbsp;and different families.

Before referring to other authors whose determinations are mentioned in the above synonymy, it may be a convenience tonbsp;concisely summarize the conclusions to which an examination ofnbsp;the East Yorkshire Cladoplihbu fronds has led me.

In the first place it seems almost certain that Pecopteris undam as figured by Lindley amp; Hutton and others is, as Nathorst suggested,,nbsp;the fertile frond of Cladophlebis dmticulata. Eurther reference isnbsp;made to this point elsewhere. The comparison of such specimensnbsp;as that figured by Lindley amp; Hutton as Pecopteris imignis, thenbsp;example represented in PI. XIV. Pig. 1 (39,236), and many others,nbsp;with specimens like that shown in PI. XIV. Pig. 3, and as figurednbsp;by authors under such names as Neuropteris or Pecopteris ligata,nbsp;P. whiibiensis, etc., in which the pinnules are smaller, has convinced me of the identity of the fronds possessing larger and smallernbsp;ultimate segments. The prominence or almost complete absence ofnbsp;dentioulations on the margin of the pinnules are characters of slightnbsp;importance. In some cases, as an examination of type-specimensnbsp;has shown, segments with a finely dentate border have beennbsp;erroneously represented in drawings as pinnules with an entirenbsp;margin. In one or two specimens in the Xational Collection andnbsp;other museums the pinnules appear to bo entire, but in othernbsp;respects the fronds cannot be separated from those with dentatenbsp;pinnules. To lay stress on such a point as this would be tonbsp;magnify a character of very small importance to the rank ofnbsp;a specific difference ; my impression is that on a large frondnbsp;of the fern Cladophlebis denticulata, we might well find somenbsp;pinnules with entire and others with a denticulate border.nbsp;Brongniart�s species Pecopteris Phillipsii, as already suggested, isnbsp;probably a somewhat imperfect example of C. denticulata.

There are certain species of fronds of the Cladophlebis type figured by several authors from Jurassic horizons which presentnbsp;a close agreement with C. denticulata, but which cannot withnbsp;safety be included in a list of synonyms. In Schenk�s admirablenbsp;work on the flora of the strata between the Keuper and the Liasnbsp;of Franconia a frond is figured as Asplenites lloesserti (Prcsl); thenbsp;drawing of this species in Schenk�s pi. x. fig. 1 * agrees verynbsp;closely with specimen Xo. 39,238 in the British Museum Collection,nbsp;and still more closely with a specimen in the Lockenhy Collection

from the Yorkshire Oolites. In Schenk�s figure we have the apical portion of a frond, which is characterized hy the open habit of thenbsp;pinnae and hy the rather short and broad form of the pointednbsp;pinnules; at the tip of the frond the pinnae are gradually replacednbsp;by single falcate segments. The striking similarity leads me tonbsp;regard the German and English plants, although from differentnbsp;geological horizons, as nearly allied, if not indeed identical.nbsp;Another specimen illustrated in Schenk�s monograph, and namednbsp;Aamp;pleniteB ottonis,^ agrees in habit with A. Roesserti, but differs innbsp;the appearance of the pinnules, which are fertile, and presentnbsp;a corrugated surface due to the presence of son parallel to thenbsp;.secondary veins; these are precisely the characters of the fertilenbsp;pinnse of C. denticulata {Pecopteru undans). It may be suggestednbsp;that Asplenites ottonis is the fertile form of the frond referred bynbsp;Schenk to A. Roesserti-, the very small fragment of the latternbsp;species described by the same author as fertile is very imperfectnbsp;and far from clear. �While speaking of the fertile pinnules,nbsp;a comparison majr be made also with some fragments figured bynbsp;Heer from Siberia, and referred bj^ him to Asplenium whitliense;nbsp;these possess long sori apparently with indusia disposed obliquelynbsp;to the midrib and parallel to the secondary veins, as in Pecopterisnbsp;undans. It is unfortunately impossible to make out the exact formnbsp;�of the sori in the English specimens or to decide on the presence ornbsp;absence of an indusium, but so far as it is possible to judge, itnbsp;would appear that the sori may have been of a type similar to thatnbsp;shown in Heer�s figures, and to such as we find in some recentnbsp;Polypodiaceous species.

In addition to the species Pteris frigtda and P. longipennis figured by Heer from Greenland, and included in the above listnbsp;as most probablj� specifically identical with Cladophlebis denticulata,nbsp;there are some other fragments of fronds referred by the samenbsp;author to Pecopteris argutula, Aspidiimi Oerstedi, and other species,nbsp;which may bo identical with C. denticulata; but it is impossiblenbsp;to decide as to the aifinities of many of these fronds. It is notnbsp;improbable that the Australian fern named by McCoy ^ Pecopterisnbsp;australis, and compared by him with the English type, w^hichnbsp;Bean named P. scarhurgensis, is identical with that species.

Bean�s name Fecopteris scarlurgemis was applied by him tO' specimens clearly identical with C. denticulata.

In Fontaine�s Potomac Flora there arc several specimens named Cladoplilebis falcata ; ¹ these have the same form of frond asnbsp;C. denticulata, but there is hardly enough evidence, withoutnbsp;ha'ving access to the specimens, to warrant the inclusion ofnbsp;the Potomac species among the synonyms of Brongniart�s plant.nbsp;Fontaine also figures some fronds which he names C. denticulata,nbsp;but speaks of this species as new, while drawing attention tonbsp;published figures of Fecopteris denticulata by Heer.^

A specimen in the British Museum Collection (V. 640) from Steierdori im Banat, named Fecopteris whithiensis, bears a verynbsp;close resemblance to Cladoplilehis denticulata, but the pinnulesnbsp;appear to have an entire margin. There are various other fossilnbsp;fronds which may be compared with Cladophlelis denticulata, e.g.nbsp;Asplenium distans as figured by Yokoyama ¹ from Japan; butnbsp;without more trustworthy evidence than a similarity in the formnbsp;of the sterile pinnae there must always be an element of uncertaintynbsp;in our comparisons.²

The point of most interest as regards the comparison of Cladoplilebis denticulata with recent ferns is the evidence affordednbsp;b}' the nature of the fertile pinnules of the fossil species. quot;Wenbsp;know nothing as to the structure of the sporangia, and ournbsp;comparisons must rest solely on the form of the fertile segmentsnbsp;and the disposition of the sori. It is among the Polj^podiaceae thatnbsp;we find the nearest resemblance to the fossil species; in some speciesnbsp;of Asplenium, e.g. A. lugulre,^ also Phegopteris decussata (L.),� thenbsp;fertile pinnules with their thin linear sori parallel to the lateralnbsp;veins agree closely with those of Cladoplilebis denticulata (videnbsp;PI. XX. Fig. 33). Kaeiborski has suggested the probability ofnbsp;Cladoplilebis denticulata � and some other species of the genus being

* nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Some specimens recently sent to me for identification from South Africa, bynbsp;Mr. Rogers, of the Geological Commission, Cape Town, appear to be identicalnbsp;with Cladoplilebis denticulata.

the sterile fronds of Osmundaceous ferns ; the form of the fertile pinnae does not favour this view, and it is more in accordancenbsp;with the availahle evidence to refer Brongniart�s species to thenbsp;Polypodiaccae. Cladoplilebis denticulata is represented in severalnbsp;museums by many large and well-preserved specimens ; some of thenbsp;finest are to be found in the collections at Whitby and Scarborough,nbsp;not infrequently labelled by Bean Pecopteris scarhurgensis.

A part of the specimen is shown in the figure. The rachis measures 7-5 cm. in length and 4 mm. in breadth; the longestnbsp;pinna is 12-5 cm. long, bearing falcated dentate segments agreeingnbsp;exactly with those of the specimens figured by Brongniart as thenbsp;type of the species. The pinnules are about l�3cm. in length.nbsp;A precisely similar form is figured by Bindley amp; Hutton asnbsp;Neuropteris ligata.

Two pinnules, represented about twice natural size, showing the fine teeth and the Cladophlelis type of venation. This specimennbsp;agrees with 13,495 (PI. XIV. Fig. 3), but on the lower pinna; thenbsp;ultimate segments are longer, reaching a length of 2-2 cm.; theynbsp;serve to connect the fronds with pinnules of intermediate lengthnbsp;with such examples as that shown in Fig. 1 (39,236), in which thenbsp;ultimate segments are longer. Towards the apex of the pinnaenbsp;the pinnules assume a shorter and more strongly falcate form.

39,236. PI. XIV. Fig. 1.

A portion only of this fine specimen is shown in the drawing. The frond has a stout rachis from which the pinnfe are given offnbsp;at an acute angle, bearing falcate pinnules reaching a length ofnbsp;2�8-3 cm. This type of frond is identical with that figured bynbsp;Bindley amp; Hutton as Pecopteris insignis; the margin of the segmentsnbsp;is finely dentate, as in the type-specimen of P. insignis.

This somewhat imperfect specimen is labelled by Bean Pecopteris Phillipsii, and it is partly on the evidence which it affords that

I have included this species as a sjmonym of Cladophlelis �dentieulata. The preservation is far from perfect, hut here andnbsp;there fine denticulations may he detected. The pinnules arenbsp;rather less falcate and narrower than in most of the specimens,nbsp;hut I feel no douht as to their specific identity, and am disposednbsp;to attribute the slight peculiarities in the appearance of this frondnbsp;to the probability of its having been dried in the sun and more ornbsp;less shrivelled before fossilization. Cf. the fertile pinnse figurednbsp;by Lindley amp; Hutton as Phlehopteris undans.

Pig. 35 represents part of a pinna of the form known as Bhlehopteris or Pecopteris undans. These fertile pinnules havenbsp;the same general form as the sterile segments, but are straighternbsp;and the margin is distinctly serrate; the surface of the lamina isnbsp;raised in the form of oblique ridges or corrugations, parallel to thenbsp;secondary veins, which are no doubt caused by the occurrence ofnbsp;oblong sori on the lower face. It is unfortunately impossible tonbsp;obtain any more precise information as to the structure of thenbsp;sori and sporangia. Cf. Schenk�s figures ' of Asplenites ottonisnbsp;and Heer�s�¹ ² figures of Asplenium whithiense �, also Peistmantel�s ²nbsp;figures of Asplenites macrocarpus.

The sterile fragment (Pig. 3�). shows the usual type of falcate and finelj'' denticulate segments; I have no doubt that both thesenbsp;fragments (3a and 35) belong to the same plant.

A small piece of a pinna of a large and well-preserved frond, agreeing exactly with the specimen figured by Lindley amp; Huttonnbsp;as Pecopteris wliitliensis. The margins of the pinnules appear tonbsp;be entire, biit in other respects the segments are exactly likenbsp;those of 40,518 (PI. XIY. Pig. 4) and 39,236 (PI. XIV. Pig. 1).nbsp;Labelled by Bean Pecopteris whiibiensis.

Heer (77²), ii. pi. xxi. figs. 3 and 4. Feistmantel (77�), pis. i., xlviii, etc.

39,245. This specimen, an imperfectly preserved portion of a fertile frond, is of interest from the point of view of thenbsp;comparison of sterile and fertile pinnae. The pinnae and pinnulesnbsp;are exactly like those represented in PL XX. Pig. 3�, hut innbsp;39,245 we have a portion of the raohis as well as pieces of three-or four pinnae attached to it. Labelled hy Bean Phlebopteris-undam. The specimen shows clearly that the leaf bearing the-fertile pinnae had the same habit as the sterile fronds.

V. 3650, V. 3651. The latter specimen is labelled by Bean Peoopteris scarhurgensis, a name which does not appear to have-been published. Similar to 39,236 (PI. XIV. Pig. 1).

V. 3940. A small piece of a pinna with long pinnules of the-� insignis � type; labelled Cycadites gramineus.

39,238. A fairly large specimen, with a rachis 17 cm. in length. The habit of the frond is distinctly open, especiallynbsp;towards the apical portion, where the pinna; are farther apart and*nbsp;the pinnules shorter and relatively broader. In the Leekenbynbsp;Collection there is a still finer example, illustrating the open habitnbsp;at the apex of a frond; we have precisely the same appearancenbsp;presented hy a specimen of Aaplenites Roesserti figured by Schenk.'nbsp;The pinnnles are slightly dentate. Labelled by Bean Pecopterisnbsp;denticulata and P. ligata,

The apical portion only is shown in the drawing. It is difficult to feel certain as to the affinity of this specimen; it appears to henbsp;identical with a similar apex of a frond figured by Heer from the

The slender rachis gives off opposite and sub-opposite pinnagt; with short, broad, and apparently entire segments. It is notnbsp;improbable that this example may be regarded as the apex ofnbsp;C. denticulata. The veins are exceedingly well shown. Cf.nbsp;specimen 39,240 (PI. XV. Pig. 5).

It is just possible that this specimen and 39,240 (PL XV. I'io- 5), both of which have pinnules with entire margins, belongnbsp;to a separate species of the type represented by P. tvhitUensis, asnbsp;figured by Lindley amp; Hutton; but we have not, I think, sufficientnbsp;e^�dence to justify a specific separation of these two specimensnbsp;from Cladophlebis denticulata.

Other specimens: � V. 376. Pragment of the apical portion of a frond similar to 39,248 (PI. X^. Pig. 4), but rather^ less;nbsp;too small to be determined. V. 3900. A small indeterminablenbsp;fragment�possibly Cladophlehis, sp.�in white sandstone, two milesnbsp;south of Ravenscar, on the Yorkshire coast. The following arenbsp;undoubted examples of C. denticulata: 10,368, 39,235, 39,277,nbsp;40,517 (a very fine pinna with long falcate pinnules 3'7 cm. long),nbsp;40,559, 52,568 (fertile pinna).

B. Ferns which afford no trustivorthy evidence as to their affinities with existing families.

2. Cladophlebis lobifolia (Phillips).

Fecopteris lobifolia, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pi. viii. fig. 13. Neuropteris undulata, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pi. Ixxxiii.nbsp;^eitropteris lohifoUa, Goppert, Foss. Farm. p. 206.

Fecopteris lobifolia, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. �i. pi- clxxix. Fecopteris lobifolia, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, fasc. vii. p* 155.nbsp;Neuropteris undulata, ibid. p. 137.

Sphenopteris undulata, ibid. p. 1171-Cladophlebis lobifolia, Bronguiart, Tableau, p. 105.

1874. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cladophlebis undulata, Schimper, loc. cit. vol. iii. p. 505.

1875. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pecopteris lobifolia, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 210, pi. viii. fig. 13.

1892. Alethopteris lobifolia, Bartholin, Bot. Tid. Bot. pi. viii. figs. 1 and 2.

1894. Dicksonia lobifolia, Eaciborski, Flor. Krak. p. 177, pi. xi. figs. 1-7; pi. xii. figs. 1-6.

Prond bipinnate. Pinnae long, linear acuminate, and spreading, given off from the rachis approximately at right angles. Pinnulesnbsp;linear, attached by a portion of the base, apices more or less acute,nbsp;the margin usually slightly lobed; the basal pinnule on the lowernbsp;side of each pinna is characterized by its greater breadth. [Nonenbsp;of the specimens in the Museum Collection afford any evidence asnbsp;to the character of the sori, but a small piece of a pinna in thenbsp;Stockholm Museum (Text-fig. 23) bears indications of marginalnbsp;sori; the data, however, are insufficient to enable us to determinenbsp;the probable position of the species.]

Some large and well-preserved examples of Cladophlebis lobifolia have been figured by Eaciborski ^ from the Jurassic rocks ofnbsp;Cracow. Among the specimens in the British Museum referrednbsp;to this species there is a great difference in the size of thenbsp;pinnules, but this is, I believe, largely due to the unusual lengthnbsp;of the pinnae, which are characterized by a gradual decrease in thenbsp;length of the ultimate segments towards the distal end. Some ofnbsp;the larger pinnae bear a resemblance to Todites Williamsoni, andnbsp;a separation of the two types is not always easy; Cladophlebisnbsp;lobifolia is usually recognizable by the narrow bases of the pinnules,nbsp;and by the spreading and open habit of the frond.

A species of Asp�enium, A. W�ardii, figured by Hooker, may be �quoted as a recent fern bearing a resemblance to Gladophkhisnbsp;lohifolia.

There are unusually large specimens of �ladophleh� lohifolia in the York Museum.

Portions of pinnse with large and clearly preserved pinnri e about 1-1 cm. in length. The 'pinnules are closely set on tnenbsp;pinnse and attached by a narrow base; the apices are aou e, annbsp;the whole pinnule directed slightly forwards. Thenbsp;clearly preserved, as shown in the enlarged drawing ( ig. )�nbsp;In one of the pinure the pinnules decrease in size towar s enbsp;distal end, where the smaller segments have a length of 5 cm.

Fragments of three pinnae similar to 10,377, but the pinnules arther apart and the margins more distinctly lobed. The form

of thesG larger pinnules resembles tha,t of some of the longer fertile segments of Todites Willimnsoni.

A large specimen, but not very clearly preserved. The figured portion is from the apical region of a pinna, and illustrates the-gradual decrease in size of the pinnules towards the apex of onenbsp;of the long pinnse. The specimen shows clearly the characteristicnbsp;open habit of the frond; long and narrow pinnae, 13 cm. long, arenbsp;attached at right angles to a slender raohis; the pinnae have annbsp;average breadth of about 1 cm., and bear fairly closely set pinnnles^nbsp;of the form shown in Fig. 21 (39,257). Those pinnae in whichnbsp;the preservation is best, show the broad basal pinnule on the lower-

side of the pinna where it is attached to the rachis. Cf. this-spccimen with the figures of Lindley amp; Hutton (pi. clxxix.) and Eaciborski (pi. xi. fig. 1). The form of the pinna; and pinnulesnbsp;is in close agreement also with that of Neuropteris undulata,nbsp;L. amp; H. (pi. Ixxxiii.).

A similar specimen to 39,230 (Fig. 22) and to the type of Lindley �� Hutton. The portion of the specimen represented innbsp;the figure illustrates the long, narrow, and spreading pinnae, andnbsp;the elongated deltoid form of the pinnules. The lower pinna innbsp;Fig. 6, PI. XV. shows the large basal pinnule immediately belownbsp;the point of attachment of the pinna to the rachis.

This specimen, for which I am indebted to the kindness mf Professor Nathorst, who also sent me an accurate sketo o ^ ^nbsp;portion shown in the figure, illustrates the mannei of occuiTcncenbsp;of the sori. The sporangia cannot be made out with any c eoi'cenbsp;of clearness, but theji- appear to have been borne in semicircu a�nbsp;pocket-like depressions on the edges of the fertile segmen s.

Fio. IZ.-CladophJeUx lohifolia (Phill.). Prom a specimen and drawing kindly lent by Professor Nathorst.

V. 3657. Part of a large pinna with pinnules ranging m length from 1'5 to 'Tem.; the individual segments agree precise y wnbsp;those of Pig. 6, PI. XV.

V. 3938. Small pieces of two pinnse with pinnules -7 c�' intermediate between the segments of such a specinmn asnbsp;Kg. 6, PI. XV. the tege terns like V. 2519, 39,MTnbsp;(Text-fig. 21), etc. Of. � Neuropteris imdulata, P. quot;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;��

V. 3939. An impci-fectly preserved specimen, with median length ; the three lowest pinme show the aioCnbsp;segments.

3. Cladophlebis haiburnensis (Lindley amp; Hutton).

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fecopteris haihurnensis, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, loss. p. 179.

1864. Fecopteris haihurnensis, Leckenby, Quart. Joum. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77.

Type-specimen. Heweastle-upou-Tj-ne Museum.� The availahle material is insufficient to enable us to give a satisfactory diagnosisnbsp;of the species. The frond was probably bipinnate; the large,nbsp;broadly linear pinnules have the Cladophlebis type of venation;nbsp;they are attached at almost a right angle, and di�er from thosenbsp;of C. denticulata in being straighter and not falcate. There arenbsp;no specimens in the British Museum Collection which can benbsp;reasonably referred to this species. A solitary example in thenbsp;Leckenby Collection, Cambridge (No. 80), agrees exactly withnbsp;the specimen figured by Lindley amp; Hutton. It is possible thatnbsp;Cladophlebis haiburnensis is not a distinct species, but the generalnbsp;appearance of the Leckenby specimen hardly favours its inclusionnbsp;in any of the other species of Cladophlebis or in Todites Williamsoni.nbsp;There is a striking similarity between C. haiburnensis and a specimen-named by Heer Asplenium whitbiense ienue?

1. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphenopteris princeps, Piesl.

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphenopteris Williamsoni, Brongniart.

3. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphenopteris Murrayana (Brongniart).

1. Sphenopteris princeps, Bresl.

1838. Sphenopteris princeps, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, vu. p. 126, pl. 1�. figs. 12 and 13.

1874. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cladophlehis modesta, Scbimper, Trait, pal. veg. vo . ui. p.

Type - specimen. Leckenby�s type - specimeii of Sphenopteris modesta is in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge (No. 149).

Fronds bipinnate, attached to an erect stem covered with imbricate pointed scales ; pinna? linear, tapering to a ^ poin ,nbsp;attached at right angles to a comparatively slender racbis, annbsp;bearing crowded pinnules with an obtuse apex and an iriegu ai ynbsp;crennlate margin. The pinnules are at right angles to the pinna?nbsp;and present a characteristic and somewhat stifi appearance ; e

venation might be described almost equally well as agreeing with the Sphenopteris or Cladophlehis type; in the larger pinnules therenbsp;is a definite midrib giving ofE forked secondary veins at an acutenbsp;angle, but in the smaller deltoid segments the venation is morenbsp;spreading and approximates more closely to that of Sphenopteris.nbsp;The fertile segments bear sporangia covering the lower surface.nbsp;The rectangular disposition of the pinnce and pinnules and thenbsp;rather indefinite ragged appearance of the delicate and finelynbsp;crenulate segments give to this species a characteristic habit.

The description of the stem and of the fertile segments is taken from Schenk�s diagnosis ' of Acrostiehites princeps; neither stemsnbsp;nor fertile segments have so far been recognized in associationnbsp;with the English specimens.

In his valuable notes on the English Jurassic plants, Hathorst^ has expressed the opinion that the specimens for which Leckenbynbsp;instituted the new specific name Sphenopteris modesta are identicalnbsp;with Presl�s Ehsetie species S. princeps, afterwards referred bynbsp;Schenk to the genus Acrostiehites and fully described andnbsp;illustrated in the Flora of the Rhcetie Beds of Franconia. Thenbsp;figures given by Schenk represent a type of frond which appearsnbsp;to be identical with Leckenby�s Sphenopteris modesta. I cannotnbsp;detect any discrepancies which justify a specific separation of thenbsp;two sets of specimens; in spite of the fact that one plant is fromnbsp;Ehsetie and the other from Lower Oolitic rocks, Nathorst�snbsp;determination has therefore been adopted.

Kathorst points out that the generic name Acrostiehites, chosen by Schenk on the strength of the fertile pinnule having thenbsp;under surface covered with sporangia, is not very suitable, asnbsp;the same manner of occurrence of sporangia is met with also innbsp;species of Aspidium and other recent genera. We may add thatnbsp;the same mode of occurrence of crowded sporangia occurs also innbsp;Todea, as illustrated by the Jurassic species formerly refeiTed tonbsp;Acrostiehites and now placed in the genus Todites. Eaciborski^nbsp;records Sphenopteris princeps from Cracow, and places it in thenbsp;Osmundaceaj under the name Todea princeps.

Some of the species mentioned in the above synonymy have heen included on the evidence furnished by Schenk as the resultnbsp;�of his examination of the actual specimens.

As there is no indication of sporangia on any of the specimens �of this species in the English collections, I have adopted what maynbsp;appear to be a somewhat retrograde course in placing Splienopterisnbsp;princeps among ferns which cannot safely be assigned to a definitenbsp;family. The evidence pnblished by Continental authors does notnbsp;seem to be sufficiently convincing to warrant the inclusion of thenbsp;Yorkshire plant in the family OsmundaceiE.

This specimen, of which a part is shown in the drawing, agrees very closely with Leckenby�s type-specimen of Splienopteris modesta,nbsp;now in the Leckenby Collection. Compare also Schenk�s � pi. viii.nbsp;fig. 1 with PI. XVI. Pig. 2 of this Catalogue; the two figuresnbsp;present a very close resemblance, and one can hardly doubt thatnbsp;they represent leaves specifically identical.

The pinnae are at right angles to the rachis, and the crowded pinnules at right angles to the axis of each pinna. There are somenbsp;fragments with smaller pinnules on the same piece of shale, whichnbsp;agree with the smaller pinnae figured by Schenk.

41,397a. The upper portion of a frond, showing that even the smaller apical pinnae are at right angles to the rachis.

41,397b. a fine specimen showing portions of several fronds, which are arranged on the shale as though converging towardsnbsp;a common stem; a similar disposition is shown more clearly innbsp;some of Schenk�s figures of the Phaetic plant (pi. viii. fig. !)�nbsp;The smaller segments in this and other specimens are more ornbsp;less deltoid in shape, with spreading, acutely forked veins.

S. Sphenopteris Williamsoni, Brongniart.

1828. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphenopteris WilUamsonis, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 177, pl. xlix..

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphenopteris digitata, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 147, pl. viii. fig. 6.nbsp;1834. Sphenopteris Williamsonis, Bindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pl. cxxxi.nbsp;1836. Sytnenophyllites Williamsonis, G�ppert, Foss. Farrn. p. 259.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Symenophyllites Williamsonis, linger. Gen. spec. foss. p. 130.

1856. Symenophyllites Williamsonis, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. p. 89. 1864. Symenophyllites Williamsonis, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc..nbsp;vol. XX. p. 76.

1869. Sphenopteris {Symenophyllites) Williamsonis, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. i. p. 410.

1875. Sphenopteris Williamsonis, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 217, pl. viii. fig. 6. 1892. Sphenopteris Williamsonis, Fox-Strangways, Tab. Foss. p. 135.

Type-specimen. Brongniart�s types in the Paris Museum (?). Type of Bindley amp; Hutton in the Scarborough Museum.

Prond ? tripinnate; the rachis slender and winged, hearing short acuminate pinnm attached at an acute angle; the pinnules arenbsp;deeply dissected into nari�ow linear and forked ultimate segments.

There is not sufficient reason for following the example of some-authors and using the generic name Ilymenophyllites for this species �wo know nothing as to the character of the sori or sporangia.

The drawing represents a portion of a pinna 7 cm. long, hearing; deeply dissected pinnules with narrow ultimate segments. Thenbsp;finer segments are traversed by a single vein, and the generalnbsp;appearance of the specimen suggests a fern with a thin or almostnbsp;filmy texture; this thin brown filmy appearance is misleading andnbsp;need not necessarily point to an originally thin lamina. There is

a fairly close resemblance between this example and Brongniart�s figure ' of a specimen of Sphenopteris dentieulata from the Yorkshire-coast.

The pinnules of this fragment are smaller and rather more delicate than those in 8250 (PL XVII. Fig. 1). Labelled bynbsp;Bean S. Williamsoms.

A smaller piece than 39,281, but the ultimate segments arc much longer; it agrees exactlj' with the figures of this species,nbsp;given hy Brongniart and by Lindlcy amp; Hutton.

13,499. Fragments similar to 8250, hut very imperfect. Compare this specimen with Phillips� figure of this species andnbsp;Williamson�s drawing in the Fossil Flora of Bindley amp; Hutton.

3. Sphenopteris Murrayana (Brongniart).

1828. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pecopteris Murrayana, Brongniart, Hist. r�g. foss. p. 358, pi. cx.xvi.

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;i Sphenopteris arbuscula, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, lign. 36, p. 216.

Frond tripinnate ; pinna; broad and spreading, given off from the rachis almost at right angles; ultimate segments crowded,nbsp;deltoid in form, and similar to those of Coniopteris hymenopliylloidesnbsp;(Brongn.).

It has been pointed out in discussing Coniopteris hymenophylloides,. that in all probability some of the specimens included hy Brongniartnbsp;and others under the name Pecopteris or Sphenopteris Murrayananbsp;may belong to a distinct species, which we have referred to.

C. hjmenophylloides; but other specimens exhibit certain differences which seem to point to the retention of Sphenopteris Murrayananbsp;for certain fern fronds agreeing with the examples figured bynbsp;Brongniart in figs 1, 2, and 4 of his pi. exxvi.' Possibly thisnbsp;separation may prove to be artificial, but it is at least a conveniencenbsp;to distinguish some of the Yorkshire ferns, which differ in a fewnbsp;points from the typical Coniopteris hymenophylloides, by a distinctnbsp;specific designation. It is hopeless to attempt a complete synonymynbsp;of Sphenopteris Murrayana as employed in the present sense, asnbsp;the greater number of the fossils so named bjquot;- various authorsnbsp;should be referred rather to C. hymenophylloides. As no specimennbsp;�exhibiting the vegetative characters which we associate withnbsp;S. Mwrrayana in its restricted sense has heen seen with fertilenbsp;pinnules, the genus Sphenopteris is retained in preference tonbsp;Pecopteris or Coniopteris.

The fronds of the S. Murrayana type appear to be characterized by a spreading habit, and by the broad pinnse being almost at rightnbsp;angles to the rachis.

The fragment illustrated consists of a secondary rachis bearing short pinnae with small pinnules having the Sphenopteris typenbsp;of venation, and agreeing fairly closely in form with those ofnbsp;Coniopteris hymenophylloides. It is, however, quite possible thatnbsp;such specimens as this may belong to the lower portions of largenbsp;Coniopteris fronds. Labelled by Bean Sphenopteris arguta.

V. 3679. A large but imperfectly preserved frond, bearing pinnae like that represented in Fig. 5. Labelled by Beannbsp;Pecopteris Murrayana.

1823.

1828.

1829.

1833.

1835.

1836. 1838.

1848.

1849.

1850. 1854.nbsp;1856.

1863.

1864.

1868.

1869.

1872.

1873,

1875.

1876.

Genus T-ffiNIOPTERIS, Brongniart.^

(PI. XVI. Fig. 1.)

Sc�aminearmn folium, Sternberg, Plor. Vorwelt, iii. p. 42, pl. xxxv�.. fig. 2.

T. vittata, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 263, pl. Ixxxii. figs. 1-4. Scolopendrinm solitarimn, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 147, pl. viii. fig. 5..nbsp;Taniopteru vittata, Bindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pl. Ixii.

Taniopteris vittata. Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, fase. vii. p. 139. Taniopteris vittata, Bronn, Ind. Pal. p. 1215.

Cf. Taniopteris Daintreei, Carruthers, Quart. Journ, Geol. Soc. vol. xxviii. pl. xxvii. fig. 6.

Taniopteris vittata, Phillips, Geol. Torks. p. 205, pl. viii. fig. 5. Oleandriditm vittatum, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. pl, i. fig. 2.

Cf. Oleandridnun tenuinerve. Schenk, Foss. Pflanz. Alhourskette,, pl. V. fig. 20.

Proud simple, liuear-lanceolate, reaching a length of more than 20 cm. and a breadth of 3 cm. The lamina increases gradually innbsp;breadth from the petiole and tapers gradually towards the apex.nbsp;Numerous secondary veins are given off at right angles fromnbsp;a broad midrib; these are simple or forked; the branching of thenbsp;lateral veins may take place close to the midrib, in the marginalnbsp;or in the intermediate portion of the lamina.

There is a close agreement between the English specimens of Taniopteris vittata and the species T. tenuinervis, Brauns, asnbsp;figured by Schenk * and other authors, but in dealing with leavesnbsp;of the Tmniopteris type it is practically hopeless to attempt tonbsp;�distinguish between closely allied and identical forms.

Unless its sori or sporangia are preserved, it is impossible to determine the family of ferns to which Tcsniopteris leaves shouldnbsp;be referred; this simple type of leaf is met with in several recentnbsp;genera, and is of little or no value as an indication of affinity.nbsp;Tmniopteris vittata is one of the commonest fossils from thenbsp;Yorkshire coast rocks.

The lower part only of the specimen is shown in the figure. The lamina is 20 cm. long, and the slightly curved petiole 2-5 cm.;nbsp;the latter appears to terminate in a fairly clean-cut face, whichnbsp;is probably the actual base by which the leaf was attached tonbsp;a rhizome. This feature suggests a comparison with the leavesnbsp;of the recent fern Oleandra neriiformis, Cav., which become cutnbsp;off near the base of the petiole by a well-marked absciss-layer.nbsp;The lamina in its broadest part measures 3 cm.; the lateral veinsnbsp;are seen to fork at varying distances from their point of originnbsp;from the broad midrib.

Pieces of Nihsonia compta and ClaAophlelis ienticulata occur on the same piece of rock.

V. 3670. A good example of a smaller frond. At the base there is a short curved petiole similar to that of 39,217, but shorter,nbsp;and the frond tapers gradually to an acuminate apex. The venationnbsp;is well preserved.

8366. Lamina 15-5 cm. long, without the apex, 1-8 cm. broad. The breadth is fairly uniform, decreasing gradually towards thenbsp;base and apex.

10,327. Pragments showing clear venation; associated with -Sagenopteris Phillipsi, Cladoplilehis lobifolia, Beania, etc.

13,501. An impression in ironstone of part of a large frond, showing very clearly the forking of the secondary veins. Midwaynbsp;between the broad midrib and the edge of the lamina there arenbsp;about seven veins to every 5 cm. of lamina; close to the marginnbsp;the veins become much more numerous.

3. TEeniopteris major, Bindley amp; Hutton.

Tmniopteris major, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pi. xcii. jispidites IVilUamsonis, Goppert, Foss. Farm. p. 353.nbsp;Tceniopteris major, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, fasc. vii. p. HO-Teeniopferis major, Bronn, Ind. Pal. p. 1214.

Teeniopteris Williamsonis, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. P- 20o. ? Teeniopteris oralis, Oldham amp; Morris, Pal. Ind. pi. i�-Cf. Teeniopteris lata, ibid. pis. i.-iii.

1900. Tamiopteris major, Sevard, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. vol. xliv. p. 14.

Frond simple, similar in venation to T. mttata, but of greater breadth in proportion to its length than the previous species.nbsp;The midrib in T. major is narrower and less prominent than innbsp;T. mttata. Veins approximately at right angles to the midrib,nbsp;rather farther apart than in T. vittaia, forked either close to thenbsp;midrib or at varying distances from their point of origin.

The specimen figured by Lindley amp; Hutton from a drawing by quot;Williamson, and now in the Manchester Museum, illustratesnbsp;the characteristic form of this broader-leaved TcBuiopteris verynbsp;clearly; the dichotomously branched veins are clearly shown.nbsp;Some authors have called attention to the venation of this speciesnbsp;as a distinguishing feature ; in T. vittata the secondary veins arenbsp;said to be simple or once forked, while in the broader form thenbsp;veins are repeatedly forked. This supposed distinction does notnbsp;hold as a satisfactory means of identification; in both the longnbsp;and narrow as well as in the broader fronds we find the samenbsp;manner of forking in the lateral veins. The differences indeednbsp;between T. vittata and T. mejor are barely sufficient to warrantnbsp;a specific separation, but as the greater breadth of T. major appearsnbsp;to be a fairly constant character, as well as other small differences,nbsp;it is probably better to retain both names.

Nathorstquot; has suggested that T. major may be an entire leaf of A.nomo%am,ites Lindleyanus, but this is, I think, improbable.nbsp;The best specimen in the British Museum Collection is the clearlynbsp;preserved portion of a leaf associated with some impressions ofnbsp;Marchantites erectus (Leek.) (No. 39,328); this form of frond,nbsp;however, is not well represented.

It is not improbable that the short and broad leaf described by Lindley amp; Hutton as Otopteris ovalis ^ may be the young frond

of T. major, as lathorst suggests;' l)ut the type-specimeu iu tho Scarborough Museum is too imperfect and indistinct to enablenbsp;one to form any decided opinion as to its nature ; the veins arenbsp;too indefinite to be made out. It is probably wiser under thesenbsp;circumstances to omit this � species,� which has been referred tonbsp;by Sternberg, Morris, Zigno, and others as Tceniopteris ovalis, fromnbsp;the list of synonyms.

10,375. Two imperfectly preserved fronds with similar venation to that of Tmniopteris vittata, but broader in proportion to theirnbsp;length and with a naiTower and loss j)rominent midrib. Alsonbsp;fragments of Sagenopteris Phillipsi, etc.

Genus SAGENOPTERIS, Presl.

The position of the genus Sagenopteris in the plant kingdom is .still undecided. More than one writer has jfiaced this Mesozoicnbsp;plant in the Marsiliaceae,�* but, as I have elsewhere pointed out,'^nbsp;the evidence on which this conclusion is based is hardly satisfactory.nbsp;While admitting the absence of such characters as might enablenbsp;us to speak with any degree of certainty as to systematic position,nbsp;I am disposed to regard Sagenopteris as probably a genus of ferns.nbsp;Fontainehas figured some leaflets of Sagenopteris from thenbsp;Potomac beds bearing small dot-like elevations, which may benbsp;the remains of sori or sporangia. He regards the specimens asnbsp;favouring the inclusion of Sagenopteris among the ferns.

major and cuneata.

1828. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Glossopteris Fhillips�, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 225, pl. Ixi. bis,

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Feeopteris pattcifolia, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pl. v�i. fig. 8.

1838. Glossopteris FhilUpsii, Stemberg, Flor. Vorwelt, fase. vii. p. 69. Tamiopteris FhilUpsii, ibid. p. 140.

1851. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sagenopteris cuneata, Bunbury, Quart, dourn. Geol. Soc. vol. vii.

1856. Fhyllopteris Fhillipsii, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. p. 166. Sagenopteris cuneata, ibid. p. 183, pl. xx. fig. 11.

1864. Glossopteris Fhillipsii, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 76.

1875. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Glossopteris Fhillipsii, Phillips, Geol. Yorks. Coast, p. 203, pl. viii.

fig. 8.

1876. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cf. Sagenopteris Charpentieri, Heer, Flor. foss. Helvet, pl. li. fig. 9.nbsp;1889. Cf. Sagenopteris elliptiea, Fontaine, Potomac Flora, p. 149, pl. xxvii.

1892. Sagenopteris FhilUpsii, Bartholin, Bot. Tids. Kj�v. p. 13, pl. v. figs. 7 and 8.

1894. Sagenopteris Fhillipsii, Eaciborski, Flor. Krakow, p. 214, pl. xx. figs. 19 and 20.

1900. Sagenopteris Phillipsi, Seward, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. vol. xliv. p. 11.

Type-specimens. Brongniart�s type in the Paris Museum (?); that �of Otopteris cuneata of Bindley amp; Hutton in the Manchesternbsp;Museum. The specimens figured by Phillips (pi. viii. fig. 8) andnbsp;hj' Bindley amp; Hutton (pi. Ixiii.) are in the York and Britishnbsp;Museums respectively.

Frond very variable, petiolate ; in some forms the petiole hears four linear lanceolate leaflets having a distinct midrib and obliquenbsp;anastomosing lateral veins ; in other foims a shorter winged petiolenbsp;bears one or two shorter and broader, somewhat obcuneate leafletsnbsp;without a midrib and traversed by spreading anastomosing veins.

The figures published by Brongniart of this species represent the leaves with dichotomous but not anastomosing secondarynbsp;veins; one of the drawings was communicated to him by Professornbsp;Phillips and another was drawn from a specimen supplied bynbsp;Dr. Murray. At a later date Brongniart instituted a new genusnbsp;Pkyllopteris * to include the leaves previously identified asnbsp;Glossopteris PM�lips� ; the specimens figured by Bindley amp;nbsp;Hutton under the latter name are referred by the French authornbsp;to Sagenopteris. This separation of the Yorkshire fossils intonbsp;two genera, Phylhpteris and Sagenopteris, was the result ofnbsp;incorrect representation of the venation in some of the earliernbsp;figures ; there is, however, no doubt as to the identity of thenbsp;plants figured by Brongniart and Bindley amp; Hutton.

In plate civ. of the Fossil Flora a smaller form of leaf with anastomosing venation is represented under the name Otopterisnbsp;cuneata; these specimens agree as regards the anastomosing veinsnbsp;with the longer and narrower leaves which the authors referrednbsp;to Glossopteris PhilUpsii, but differ in the absence of a midrib andnbsp;in having fewer leaflets on each frond. The original specimennbsp;of one of the drawings in plate civ. of the Fossil Flora is now innbsp;the Manchester Museum.^

In 1851 Bunbury discussed at some length the affinities of Otopteris cuneata, B. amp; H.; he considered that this species �isnbsp;merely an imperfect or abnormal state�probably a seedling�ofnbsp;Sagenopteris PJiillipsi.� Speaking of a specimen in Mr. Bean�snbsp;collection, which is in all probability Ho. 39,311 in the British

Museum Collection (pi. xviii. fig. 3), Bunbuiy draws attention to-the occurrence of one �inrersely hcart-sliapcd � terminal leaflet �cleft into two lobes.� �This sort of variation,� he adds,nbsp;� appears quite analogous to what we often see in the primordialnbsp;or seedling- fronds of recent ferns.� In the third edition ofnbsp;Phillips� Geology of the Yorhshire Coad it is also suggested thatnbsp;this cuneate form may be specifically identical with the longer-leaved Sagenopteris Phillipsi} Some leaflets from Australia figurednbsp;by Feistmantcl ¹ ² as Glossopteris spatlmlata-cordata bear a closenbsp;resemblance to Sagenopteris PltiUipsi, var. cuneata.

Although it is impossible to decide the question of identity of Sagenopteris PhilUpsi and 8. cimeata, I am inclined to agreenbsp;with Bunbury that it is at least reasonable to suppose that bothnbsp;forms of leaf woi�o borne by the same species. Evidence of thenbsp;variation in the form of the leaf displayed by this genus is furnishednbsp;by numerous specimens (in the British and other Museums) of whatnbsp;no one would hesitate to refer to S. PhilUpsi: the size of thenbsp;leaflets varies considerably; the proportion of breadth to lengthnbsp;and the distinctness or prominence of the midrib are charactersnbsp;subject to considerable variation. Again, in the series of figures-of the Ehffitie species Sagenopteris rhoifolia (Prosl), and in thenbsp;drawings of species of this genus published by Zig-no and Nathorst,nbsp;we have abundant proof of the variability displayed by the leaflets..

There is a reference in the later edition of Phillips� work and in the more recent notes on Jurassic plants by Nathorst to a larger-form of Sagenopteris leaflet, represented in the Lockenby Collectionnbsp;and elsewhere, which agrees clo.soly with 8. Goeppertiana describednbsp;by Zigno from the Italian Oolites. A loaf figured by FeistmantoPnbsp;as Sagenopteris, sp., may also be compared with this larger type ofnbsp;8, PhilUpsi. This form of leaflet is represented in Fig. 26, drawnnbsp;from a specimen in the Scarborough Museum; a still largernbsp;example of this form in the Manchester Museum has a length ofnbsp;11 cm.²

In spite of the striking difference between such a leaflet a.s that shown in Text-fig. 26 and the leaflets represented in Figs. 2-4 of

PI. XVII I. and Text-fig. 24, I believe it is the better plan to include all under one specific name, and as a matter of conveniencenbsp;to refer to tbe very small and very large forms as Sagenopterisnbsp;PhilUpsi, var. cuneata, and S. Phillipsi, var. major, respectively.nbsp;Such a method of designating by descriptive varietal names extremenbsp;types of leaves which may be connected by a fairly complete seriesnbsp;of transitional forms, and which there is no sufficient reason fornbsp;referring to as to distinct species, may in some cases provenbsp;convenient.

The English species of Sagenopteris, 8. Phillipsi, differs from S. rhoifolia and from 8. Ooeppertiana chiefly in the longer andnbsp;narrower form of the leaflets, but the larger type of leaf suchnbsp;as that shown in Text-fig. 26, and the intermediate forms represented by fig. 1, pi. Ixiii. of Linclley amp; Hutton (No. 39,221 in thenbsp;Museum Collection), agree very closely with Schenk�s figures ofnbsp;8. rhoifolia,'^ and with those given by Zigno of 8. Goeppertiana.'�nbsp;The specimens from Australia, figured by Eeistmantel as 8.rhoifolia,^nbsp;are very similar to many of the forms of 8. Phillipsi. In a letternbsp;written by Bean* to Bindley in 1832 accompanying the drawingsnbsp;afterwards published in the Fossil Flora (pi. Ixiii.), the broader-leaved form is named Peeopteris Bunnii, but this designation, likenbsp;many of Bean�s manuscript names, was never adopted. Some ofnbsp;the narrower-leaved forms of 8, Phillipsi may be compared withnbsp;8. angustifolia, Zigno,� and with 8. undulata, Nathorst.�

A fragment recently figured by Shirley from Queensland as Sagenopteris cuneata �� is too small for accurate determination.

39,222. Text-fig. 24. Also Bindley amp; Hutton, Fossil Flora, pi. Ixiii. fig. 2.

In this specimen there is a petiole 3'7 cm. long, bearing four linear lanceolate segments in which the midrib is well markednbsp;and the lateral anastomosing veins stand out very clearly. The

^ My thanks are due to Professor Lebour, of Newcastle, for giving me access .to this letter.

drawing by Miss Helen Thornhill, published by Lindley amp; Hutton, does not convey an accurate idea of the fine and radially elongatednbsp;meshes formed by the secondary veins. The tips of the segments

have not been preserved; the longest measures 6'5 cm. in length, and is 1 cm. broad at the broadest part.

This specimen agrees in essential respects with the preceding, but the four leaflets appear to have become detached from the

common petiole, and occur spread out on the shale at a wider angle from one another than in the example shown in Text-fig. 24.nbsp;The right-hand leaflet shows the tapering apical portion and thenbsp;characteristic curvature of the narrowed distal end.

This example, which agrees closely with those figured by Bindley amp; Hutton as Otopteris cuneata^ consists of a stalk 4 mm. wide, withnbsp;a thick median portion and thin lateral wings, bearing two cuneiformnbsp;segments. The segments have a fairly well-marked midrib, dividingnbsp;the lamina into unequal portions ; the secondary veins exhibit thenbsp;same kind of anastomoses as in the longer segments of PI. XVIII.nbsp;Fig. 4. The general appearance of these specimens reminds onenbsp;of the small leaves in Pavia and other Dicotyledons, which arenbsp;intermediate between bud - scales and true foliage leaves. Thenbsp;question of the specific identity of these smaller forms and thenbsp;longer-leaved type has been discussed in the introductory remarksnbsp;on Sagenopteris Phillipsii.

A single obcordate segment attached to a fairly broad petiole, which ends basally in a clean-cut surface evidently representing thenbsp;actual base of attachment. The specimen is 3 cm. long. Therenbsp;is no definite midrib, but the lamina is traversed by spreadingnbsp;and anastomosing veins. Bunbury refers to this specimen in hisnbsp;remarks on Sagenopteris cuneata^ L. amp; H. A similar specimen, innbsp;which a short petiole terminates in a single leaflet, may bo seennbsp;in the Scarborough Museum.

This is certainly the type-specimen of fig. 1 in pi. Ixiii. of Bindley and Hutton; the original drawing is reversed, and the venationnbsp;characters are not accurately shown, the meshes being much toonbsp;largo. The preservation of this example is remarkably good;

� For a figure of the type-specimen of Lindley amp; Hutton, vide Seward (00), pi. iii. fig. 7.

there are four leaflets, shorter and broader than those in 39,222 {Text-fig. 24), borne on a common petiole; each leaflet is aboutnbsp;4'5 cm. long and 1�6 cm. broad, with a distinct midrib and longnbsp;narrow meshes foi-mcd by the secondary veins. This tj^pe ofnbsp;leaf foms a more or less intennediate form between the longnbsp;and narrow type shown in Text-fig. 24 and the large segmentnbsp;represented in Text-fig. 26. There is a striking resemblancenbsp;between this specimen and some of the figures of Sagenopterisnbsp;rhoifolia as published by Schenk ; it emphasizes the very close

agreement between the Lower Oolite and Rhoetic species, which indeed can hardly be separated by any satisfactory characteristics.nbsp;Gristhorpe Bay.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Bean Coll.

The � original of this figure is in the Scarborough Museum; there is a similar but rather smaller example in the Britishnbsp;Museum Collection, �lo. 40,468, but a still longer specimen occursnbsp;in the Manchester Museum,^ measuring about 11cm. long; thenbsp;figured specimen measures 8'5cm. in length and 2 cm. in breadth.nbsp;There is a close agreement between this leaflet and those of

Saffempteris Ooeppertiana figured fiy Zigno.' The midrib is well marked in tbe lower part of the leaf, but it gradually dies outnbsp;towards the distal end of the lamina. Cf. also Ifathorst�s figuresnbsp;�of 8. rlioifolia from Sweden.^

Other specimens :�10,378. Portions of three leaflets broader than 39,222 (Text-fig. 24), but narrower than 39,221 (Lindley amp;nbsp;Hutton, pi. Ixiii. fig. 1), 40,468, 40,469, 40,558.

Fig. 26.�Sagenoptens Fhillipsi, var. major. From a specimen in the Scarborough ilnseum. (Nat. size.)

Brongniart instituted this genus in 1828, defining it as follows: '�Foliae pinnatie vol bipinnatoe, pinnulis integris coriacois enorviis

vel uninerviis, basi constriotis nee racbi adnatis.� ' He notes the form of the pinnules, which are never lohed, and the absencenbsp;of veins as characteristic features. Brongniart and many othernbsp;authors place Pachypteris among the ferns, but in 1845 linger¹ ²nbsp;included the genus among the �Cycadaceee dubise,� and Andrae²'nbsp;regarded it as a member of the Taxinese. Zigno instituted thenbsp;genus DicJiopteris for ferns having bipinnate fronds characterized bynbsp;a stout rachis bearing linear pinnse with short lanceolate or ovatenbsp;segments traversed by several veins. A specimen figured by thisnbsp;author as a portion of a fertile frond of Bicliopteris microplvylla,nbsp;Zigno,² has been accepted by Schimper and others as definitelynbsp;settling the fem-nature of the genus. This critical examplenbsp;I regard as a piece of a fertile frond of Todites; the pinnulesnbsp;agree in shape and in the arrangement of the sporangia withnbsp;the fertile segments of Todites WilUamsoni (Brongn.).� In 1873nbsp;Saporta proposed a new genus Scleropteris for several imperfectlynbsp;known species previously referred to Pomel�s genus Laxopteris,nbsp;to Sphenopteris, Bichopteris, and Pachypteris.^ It is probable thatnbsp;more than one generic type of plant is included in Saporta�snbsp;genus; some of the species are undoubtedly ferns, while others,nbsp;formerly referred to Pachypteris or Bichopteris, may possibly benbsp;Cycadean. In placing Pachypteris among the ferns of doubtfulnbsp;affinity, it is not intended to imply that the evidence availablenbsp;renders that position in any sense established. The argumentnbsp;advanced by Brongniart against Unger�s reference of Pachypterisnbsp;to the Cycads, that no Cycad is known with bipinnate fronds,nbsp;cannot be maintained; in the Australian genus Bowenia we havenbsp;a well-known instance of a Cycad with bipinnate leaves, and itnbsp;is very probable that this form of leaf was not infrequently bornenbsp;by stems having the structure of Cycads. Recent research hasnbsp;thoroughly established the closest afiinity between Cycadean andnbsp;P�icincan types in the Palaeozoic epoch, and there is evidence thatnbsp;during the Mesozoic period the distinction between Perns and

Cycads was mucli less marked than at the present day. It may well be that Pachj/pteris is an extinct type in which fern-likenbsp;fronds were attached to a stem possessing the structure of a Cycad.nbsp;We have recently been taught to recognize the intimate association,nbsp;and indeed the common origin, of Perns and Cycads, and wenbsp;cannot expect, in dealing with fronds alone, to be able to drawnbsp;a sharp line of distinction between these two classes of the plant-kingdom. The view that Pachypteris may represent an extinctnbsp;genus intermediate between Cycads and Perns was held by Braunnbsp;in 1854, and this may well he the nearest approach to the truth.nbsp;In a recent paper on Cretaceous plants from Lesina, Krasser' hasnbsp;given the history of the genus Pachypteris; this author discussesnbsp;at length the affinity of the genus, which he includes among thenbsp;Cycadaceae.

Pachypteris lanceolata, Brongniai-t.

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphempteris ? lanceolata, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 153, pi. x. fig. 6..nbsp;Netiropteris laevigata, ibid. p. 154, pi. x. fig. 9.

1852. Pachypteris lanceolata, Ettingshausen, Abb. k.-k. geol. Eeichs. vol. i.. Abth. 3, p. 3.

1856. Fachypteris lanceolafa, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i p. 73. Diehopteris lanceolata, ibid. p. 118, pi. xiv. fig. 2.

1875. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Fkhopteris lanceoUta, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 200, pi. s. fig. 6.

1876. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Of. Fachypteris brevipinmta, Feistraantel, Pal. Ind. pi. iii. fig. 7;

Typc-specimena. The type-specimens of Phillips are said to ho in the York Museum, but I was unable to identify them amongnbsp;the plants in that collection. The example figured by Saportanbsp;[(73), pi. xlv. fig. 3] is in the Scarborough Museum (Text-fig. 28).

Prond bipinnate ; rachis stout ; the linear pinnse bear thick ultimate segments obliquely inclined to the axis, lanceolate ornbsp;�of narrow oval form with an entire or slightly lobod margin;nbsp;veins very indistinct, probably more than one in each pinnule.

The material afforded by the East Yorkshire plant-beds is too fragmentary and insufficient to enable us to give a satisfactorynbsp;diagnosis of the species to which the English specimens arenbsp;referred. It is not improbable that more than one specific typenbsp;is represented by the two examples shown in Text-figs. 27 and 28,nbsp;but in view of the meagre data and the probable variation in thenbsp;form of the pinme and pinnules in one large frond, it is wiser tonbsp;I�efrain from any attempt at specific separation.

The specimens which Brongniart named Pacliypteris lanceolata and P. ovata were obtained from a locality near 'Whitby; theynbsp;are specifically identical with the portions of fronds figured bynbsp;Phillips in 1829 as Sphenopteris ? lanceolata and Neuropterisnbsp;Imvigata. Saporta, in discussing the English specimens, pointsnbsp;out that Brongniart�s description of the pinnules as being withoutnbsp;visible veins, or as' having a single vein, is not accurate, thenbsp;lamina of each ultimate segment being traversed by several veins.nbsp;The few fragments of Fachypteris obtained from English localities

do not afford any evidence of the existence of a single midi'ib in the pinnules, as figured by Brongniart. In all probability thenbsp;thick pinnules were traversed by several veins, as shown innbsp;Zigno�s figures of Italian specimens. Saporta considers Pachypterisnbsp;ovata of Brongniart identical with Pfeuropteris Icevigata of Phillips,nbsp;and changes the latter name to Scleropteris Imigata; the figure

Fig. 27.�Pachyptcris lanceolata, Brongn. From a specimen in the Whitby Museum, No. 2376. (Nat. size.)

given by Saporta of this form is from a drawing by Williamson which was sent by him to Brongniart; it was evidently madenbsp;from the Scarborough specimen shown in Text-fig. 28. Therenbsp;is a close agreement as regards the habit of the frond and thenbsp;form of the pinnae between a large specimen described by Saporta

as Scleropteris Pomelii^ from the Corallian of Verdun (Meuse) and the English species, but it is not clear that the two are identical.nbsp;d3y far the best examples of Pachypteris are those described by

Zigno as species of Bichopteris from the Italian Oolite; in size and preservation they are greatly superior to the Yorkshire

specimens.^ It is possible that Paohypteris [Bichopteris) Visianiea (Zigno) is specifically identical with P. lanceolata. An interestingnbsp;�example of Paohypteris has been described more recently bynbsp;Krasser from the Chalk of Lesina under the name P. dalmatica?

This specimen (Whitby Museum, No. 2376) represents an imperfect pinna bearing thick pinnules, reaching a length ofnbsp;1 cm., in which the veins cannot be detected.

The original of Williamson�s drawing published by Saporta.^ As in the Whitby specimen, the veins are not visible; innbsp;this example several of the segments have a slightly lobednbsp;margin, and bear a striking resemblance to those of Scleropterisnbsp;Pomelii, Sap.^

Group GYMNOSPERM^.

CYCADALES.

The term Cycadalcs is used as a comprehensive designation to-include certain fossil genera which are usually spoken of as Cycads, but do not conform to the accepted definition of thenbsp;existing Cycadacese. It is well known that the Mesozoic Periodnbsp;was characterized botanically by the abundance of plants hearingnbsp;pinnate fronds very similar to those of recent Cycads. Thesenbsp;extinct types, at least in some cases, have been shown to differnbsp;essentially from the modern Cycadacem in their reproductivenbsp;structures, which diverge too widely from the type representednbsp;by the flowers of living Cycads to admit of the inclusion of thenbsp;fossil genera in the family Cycadacem. It has been foundnbsp;convenient, therefore, to make use of the class-name Cycadalesnbsp;to include both the existing Cyoadaoese and certain fossil generanbsp;of which the floral structures are known, with others with whichnbsp;we are acquainted only as regards their leaves or stems.

Amongst the Jurassic Cycadean genera we have the type Williamaonia, which is of special interest as representing annbsp;extinct division of the Cycadales definitely marked off from the truenbsp;Cycads hy the morphology of the floral organs ; this division isnbsp;spoken of as the Bennettitese. Other Cycadean genera abundantlynbsp;represented in the Jurassic flora cannot at present he referrednbsp;with certainty either to the Bennettitem or to the Cycadacem;nbsp;these may be dealt with as types of Cycadales, without beingnbsp;included in either of the two families or divisions. It is probablenbsp;that the genus Anomozamites' should ho included with Williamsonianbsp;as a member of the Bonnettitoae.

Under this head we include the genus Willianisonia, which may be conveniently retained as a Mesozoic type closely alliednbsp;to Bermettites. There appears to be good evidence also in favournbsp;of including the genus Anomoiamites in the Bennettiteee. Innbsp;the second volume of the Wealden Catalogue ^ I have usednbsp;Williamsonia in the sense of a suhgenus of Bennetiites, and itnbsp;is possible that this is the wiser course to adopt; on the othernbsp;hand, we are less intimately acquainted with the plants usuallynbsp;referred to Williamsonia than with the original species of Bennetiites,nbsp;and it is a convenience to retain the former name as denotingnbsp;a member of the Bennettiteee which has long been known asnbsp;a Jurassic genus of doubtful affinity.

1. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Williamsonia gigas (Bindley amp; Hutton).

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Williamsonia pecten (Phillips).

The history of Williamsonia was dealt with at length in the second volume of the Wealden Catalogue, and need not he recapitulated.-Since my account of Williamsonia was written I have had annbsp;opportunitj' of examining several specimens of the genus, and fromnbsp;some of them, more particularly from English examples in thenbsp;Natural History Museum, Paris, I have been able to satisfynbsp;myself that Williamson�s restoration of the Yorkshire Oolitenbsp;plant � � Williamsonia gigas � is in essentials correct. Thenbsp;pinnate Cycadean fronds described in 1835 as Zamia gigas werenbsp;undoubtedly home on a stem which presented an appearancenbsp;practically identical with that of most recent Cycads; the samenbsp;stem also bore flowering shoots which terminated in flowers

1. Williamsonia gigas (Lindley amp; Hutton).

[Foss. Flor. vol. iii. pi. clxv. 1835.]

(PI. V.; PL VI. Fig. 2 ; PI. VII.; PL VIII. Fig. 1; Text-fig. 29.)

Zamia MantelU, Brongniart, Prodrome, p. 94.

Zamia gigas, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pi. clxv.

Odontopteris faleata, GSppert, Foss. Farm. p. 210.

Odontopteris faleata, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, vii. p. 78, pi. .vxiii. fig. 1.

Zamites falcatus, ibid. p. 197.

Zamitos gigas, Morris, Annals, vol. vii. p. 116.

Ftilophyllum fakatum, ibid. p. 118.

Eneephalartos gigas, Miquel, Mon. Cycad. p. 61.

Zamites gigas, Mantell, Medals of Creation, p. 116.

Zamites gigas, Broun, Ind. Pal. p. 1378.

Zamites gigas, Brongniart, Tableau, p. 106.

Podozamites gigas, ibid. p. 62.

P. falcatus, ibid.

Zamites Moreaui, ibid. p. 106.

Zamites gigas, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, foss. p. 283.

Zamites Schmiedelii, Andrae, Foss. Flor. Sieben. pi. ix.

Zamites gigas, Morris, Brit. Foss. p. 25.

Zamites gigas, Leckenby, Quart. Journ, Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77.

Cf. Zamites Penevieri, Heer, Urwelt Schweiz, p. 144, fig. 95. Williamsonia gigas, Carruthers, Trans. Linn. Soo. vol. xxvi. p. 693.nbsp;Zamites gigas, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. ii. pp. 105 and 205.nbsp;Zamites gigas, Williamson, Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxvi. p. 663.nbsp;Zamites gigas, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. ii. p. 41.

Zamites gigas, Saporta, Pal. Franq. vol. ii. p. 87, pi. Ixxxi. fig. 1.

Z. Feneonis, ibid. p. 99, pis. Ixxxvii.-xcii.

Z. claravallensis, ibid. p. 108, pi. xxiii. fig. 1.

Z. Moreaui, ibid. pi. Ixxxiv. figs. 1 and 2.

Z. Menevieri, ibid. pi. xciii. fig. 2.

Williamsonia gigas, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 225, lign. 53, pi. xxiv.

? Zamites Feueonsis, Heer, Flor. foss. Helvet, pi. lii.

Williamsonia of. gigas, Feistmantel, pi. xliv.

Zamites gigas, Renault, Cours bot. foss. vol. i. p. 54.

Z. Feneonis, ibid. p. 54, pi. v. fig. 4.

Z. Moreaui, ibid. p. 54, pi. vi. fig. 5.

1883. Williamm�a gif/as, 'Williamson, E. Instit. Gt. Brit. 1883, p. 3, figs. 1-4.

1889. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cf. Williamsonia virgimensis, Fontaine, Potomac Flora, p. 273,

Ti/pe-specimens. The specimens of flowers figured by quot;Williamson .are in the possession of Mrs. Crawford quot;Williamson. Those figurednbsp;by Phillips and by Young amp; Bird are in the quot;Whitby Museum.nbsp;[The original of Mantell�s figure of the flower published in thenbsp;Medals of Creation (p. 16) is in the Museum of Practical Geology,nbsp;Jermyn Street, London.]

Main stem similar to the ordinary type of Cycadean trunk in being covered with persistent bases of petiole. Leaves pinnate,nbsp;agreeing in habit with the fronds of most recent species of Cycadacese;nbsp;the crowded linear lanceolate pinme with acuminate apices arenbsp;attached to the upper face of the rachis by their slightly roundednbsp;bases, which were probably swollen, as in several recent species innbsp;which the pinnae possess a basal callosity. The stiff lamina of thenbsp;pinnae is traversed by several parallel, or slightly spreading, andnbsp;�occasionally forked veins. The lower part of the rachis is prolongednbsp;below the basal pinnae as a petiole attached by a swollen base tonbsp;the stem. The pinnae are for the most part given off from the rachisnbsp;at a wide angle; in the lower portion of the frond the pinnae arenbsp;shorter and broader and almost at right angles to the axis ; in thenbsp;middle of the frond they are more crowded, longer, and given offnbsp;at an acute angle, while towards the apex of the frond they arenbsp;narrower, and attached at a much more acute angle, or almostnbsp;parallel to the rachis.

From the main stem were given off one or more comparatively �slenderbranches (�peduncles�) bearing linear acuminate scale-leavesnbsp;�often clothed with ramenta; each of these branches terminated innbsp;an ovoid flower surrounded by linear bracts, and probably agreeingnbsp;in structure with the flower of Bennettites.

The above description is far from complete, but it is intended to convey a general rather than a detailed view of the plant asnbsp;a whole. In all probability the flowers of the genus Williamsonianbsp;agreed in essentials with those of the Lower Cretaceous and quot;lYealdennbsp;Bennettites, but unfortunately the absence of internal structure

prevents us speaking with certainty as to the floral characters of WilUamsonia gigm. During the last lew years numerousnbsp;silioified stems of Bennettites have been discovered in ITorth Americannbsp;beds, and a preliminary account ol the flowers of some of thesenbsp;species by Mr. Wieland,' of Newhaven, leads us to look forwardnbsp;�with considerable interest to the publication of his more detailednbsp;work. One of the most interesting points brought to light bynbsp;Wieland�s work concerns the nature of the male reproductivenbsp;organs. I am indebted to the courtesy of this investigator fornbsp;a- section through the male sporophylls of a flower, which showsnbsp;very clearly several sporangia containing microspores (pollen-grains). The microspores bear a striking resemblance to thosenbsp;of recent Cycads.

In describing the specimens of WilUammnia gigas in the British Museum, I liavo drawn attention to several features which enablenbsp;us to obtain a fairly comprehensive view of the external chai�actersnbsp;ol this interesting type of the Bennettiteaj.

was afterwards f^uoted by this author as a synonym of Zamites gigas, L. amp; H. For this reason, and because the latter name hasnbsp;been generally adopted, the older specific designation is discarded.nbsp;The earliest figure of an English specimen of this species wasnbsp;published by Young amp; Bird in 1822.^ The fronds ol WilUamsonianbsp;gigas (L. amp; H.) represent a type of Cycadean foliage which wasnbsp;abundant and widely distributed during the Jurassic period; it isnbsp;verjr difficult to decide which of the many pinnate fronds ol thenbsp;Zamites type should be included under W. gigas. Some at least ofnbsp;the fronds described by French authors from Jurassic rocks are nonbsp;doubt specifically identical with the Yorkshire plant, but it is notnbsp;improbable that other species, not included in the above synonym^',nbsp;might reasonably be referred to the English type. A collectionnbsp;of Yorkshire specimens in the Natural History Museum, Paris,nbsp;contains some of the most important examples of WilUamsonianbsp;gigas, and an examination of these fossils has aided me considerablynbsp;in forming an opinion as to the close affinity of WilUamsonia withnbsp;Bennettites.

The late Professor Williamson devoted a considerable time Aluring the earliest years of his scientific life to the investigationnbsp;�of the fossils to which Carruthers gave the name Williamsonia.nbsp;Jlo one has had opportunities of studying this genus as itnbsp;occurs in the rooks near Scarborough equal to those enjoyed bynbsp;Williamson ; and it is interesting to find that the most recentnbsp;work has tended to support many of the conclusions arrived atnbsp;by this observer. As early as 1834 Williamson^ expressed thenbsp;opinion that Zamites gigas was connected with Williamsonia, andnbsp;in his very able paper, published in 1870,^ this author is confirmednbsp;in the view of the organic connection of these two sets of fossils.nbsp;This opinion was shared also by Brongniart,^ who received annbsp;unusually fine collection of English Williamsonias from the latenbsp;Wr. Yates. These specimens are now in the Natural Historynbsp;Museum, Paris, and many of them were drawn for Brongniartnbsp;with a view to publication, but the work was unfortunatelynbsp;never completed. The drawings were afterwards made use ofnbsp;by Saporta in his comprehensive work on Jurassic plants. Innbsp;describing the Yates specimens, Saporta expresses himself stronglynbsp;against the generally accepted view as to the union of Williamsonianbsp;and Zamites. Ho does not hesitate to separate the Zamites frondsnbsp;from any connection with the Williamsonias. There is, he admits,nbsp;� une certaine conformite apparente entre les appareils florauxnbsp;auxqucls on peut laisser Ie nom de Williamsonia et lo Zamitesnbsp;gigas, tel que Ic fait voir le rcmarquable empreinte de la collectionnbsp;du Mus�um de Paris (A�oy. pi. Ixxxi. fig. 1). Nous avons tout bicnnbsp;�do consid�rer les Williamsonia comme repr�sentant I�inflorescencenbsp;d�uno monoootyl�done primitive, r�v�lant un type de Pandan�esnbsp;plus ou moins analogue aux Yticeites, aux Podocarya, aux Eolirionnbsp;de Andrae, etc.� ^

A recent examination of the Yates Collection in Paris, and amp; comparison of the numerous specimens in the Museums ofnbsp;London, Cambridge, Whitby, Scarborough, Leeds, and other towns,nbsp;have led me without hesitation to regard the pinnate Cycadean

* nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;AVilliamson (37), p. 230.nbsp;^ Williamson (70), p. 663.nbsp;^ Brongniart (49), p. 62.

fronds of Zamites gigds as the leares of the plant which hore a Williamsonian inflorescence.

One not infrequently finds a small bud or young Williamsonia borne on the end of a peduncle about 20 or 30 cm. long and 3 to-5 cm. broad. The peduncle is covered with linear lanceolate scale-leaves spirally disposed and often clothed with delicate hair-likenbsp;ramenta, such as occur on the scale-leaves of Lioon and other recentnbsp;Cycads. A peduncle of this kind is figured by Sax)orta in pi. xv.nbsp;of vol. iv.^ The original is in the Paris Museum ; the scale-leaves are less prominent and not so thick as those shown in thenbsp;drawing, and in this and other specimens one sees traces of thenbsp;ramental appendages. The best example of a peduncle is includednbsp;in the series of specimens of WilUammnia now in the possession ofnbsp;Mrs. Crawford Williamson, to whom my thanks are due for annbsp;opportunity afforded me of examining the fossils figured innbsp;Professor Williamson�s valuable memoir.

Saporta alludes to the resemblance of the peduncle which he figures to the stem of Zamites gigas,'^ represented in his volumenbsp;on Cycads (pi. xi. fig. 1), hut he does not regard the .similarity asnbsp;evidence of relationship or identity. This specimen of Zamitesnbsp;referred to in the above quotation, from the second volume of thenbsp;Plantes Jurassiques, is of exceptional interest and furnishes the mostnbsp;important link in the argument in favour of the connection betweennbsp;Williamsonia and Zamites gigas. Saporta�s figure is very imperfect,nbsp;and conveys but a poor and erroneous idea of the actual specimen.nbsp;In the lower part of the figure is shown a stem about 5 cm.nbsp;broad, with the surface features indistinctly preserved, hut showingnbsp;a number of imperfect scale-leaves. To one side of the stem, 5 cm.,nbsp;from the bottom of the specimen, are attached the petioles of twonbsp;clearly preserved fronds of Zamites gigas, and above these occurs,nbsp;part of a third frond apparently in its natural position but withoutnbsp;the petiolar attachment. The stem is prolonged obliquely upwards-to the left in the form of a branch about 3 cm. broad and 14 cm.nbsp;long. This branch is thickly clothed with hairy leaf-scales, andnbsp;terminates in numerous spreading leaf-scales of a narrow linearnbsp;lanceolate form. The po.sition and surface features of this branch

are very inadequately and incorrectly reproduced in Saporta�s figure. If we now turn to the specimen figured by the samenbsp;author as a peduncle of Williamsonia,''- and which terminates innbsp;what appears to be a closed Williamsonian inflorescence, we find thenbsp;characters are identical with those of the branch of the stem whichnbsp;bears the Zamites fronds. Specimens of peduncles in the Britishnbsp;Museum, and others in the collections of Whitby, Scarborough, andnbsp;Leeds, afford similar proof of the identity of the detached pedunclesnbsp;and the obliquely placed branch of the leaf-bearing stem. Therenbsp;can be little doubt that the terminal bud-like structure on thesenbsp;peduncles is a young and unexpanded Williamsonia, but even ifnbsp;this be disputed, there can be no question aS to the identity ofnbsp;the typical scale-leaves of Williamsonia and those of the terminalnbsp;bud on the peduncles.

A specimen in the Whitby Museum shows a stem bearing two diverging peduncles, and evidence of the same habit of growth isnbsp;afforded by an example in the British Museum. In all probabilitynbsp;the stem figured by Saporta^ bore another peduncle in additionnbsp;to that shown in the figure ; this is suggested not only by thenbsp;examination of other specimens but also by the oblique positionnbsp;of the peduncle, which is not brought out in the figure. Thenbsp;restoration of Zamites given by Williamson in his well-knownnbsp;paper � accurately represents what I believe to have been thenbsp;manner of attachment of the inflorescence and foliage-leaves tonbsp;the main stem. ^

The whole subject of the Bennettitem and other fossil Cycadales will be more fully dealt with in a forthcoming monograph onnbsp;British Cycads to be published by the Palaeontographical Society.

Specimens of both the fronds and flowers of Williamsonia gigas are abundantly represented in the British Museum, and in the Naturalnbsp;History Museum, Paris. Examples of fronds in the Newcastlenbsp;and Paris Museums suggest that the segments had an imbricatednbsp;arrangement in the young condition. Specimens of pedunclesnbsp;are by no means common; the best are those in the Museums ofnbsp;Paris, Cambiidgo, Scarborough, Whitby, and Leeds. No undoubted

examples of seeds have been discovered in connection with the reproductive organs, but in a transverse section cut throughnbsp;a small flower at the apex of a peduncle (Scarborough Museum)nbsp;one or two oval depressions were noticed, which may be due tonbsp;the presence of small seeds. The best examples of Williamsonianbsp;flowers arc those in the Yates Collection, Paris, and the specimensnbsp;figured by the late Professor 'Williamson, which are now in thenbsp;possession of Mrs. Crawford Williamson.

This is a good example of a small frond of Williamsonia gigas ; it measures 23 cm. in length, and illustrates the characteristicnbsp;habit of the leaf and the form and manner of attachment of thenbsp;pinnae. The rachis is comparatively slender, and hears on its uppernbsp;surface numerous alternately disposed linear lanceolate pinnae withnbsp;rounded bases and acuminately pointed tips ; the basal portionnbsp;of some of the pinnae is slightly hollowed out in the centre andnbsp;suggests the original presence of a callus. At the apex of the frondnbsp;the pinnm are narrow and linear, and at the actual tip they are almostnbsp;parallel to the rachis; in the lower portion of the frond the pinnaenbsp;are shorter and broader, and approximately at right angles to thenbsp;rachis, while in the middle of the frond they are more crowded,nbsp;longer, and given ofE at a different angle.

This frond should be compared with Sapurta�s figures of Zamites Feneonis, Brongn.,� which I regard as specifically identical withnbsp;Williamsonia gigas, and with Andrae�s figures of Zamites Schmiedelii,nbsp;Sternb.^

This figure shows the swollen base of a petiole of a frond more than 60 cm. in length, of which the apical portion has not beennbsp;preserved; when complete, it must have been about 80 cm. long.nbsp;The petiole has a length of 11 cm., and terminates below innbsp;a thick, irregularly oval base.

Part of a frond 21 cm. in leng-tli. The small piece shown in the figure illustrates the rounded form of the pinna base andnbsp;the median concavity, indicating the existence of a callus or basalnbsp;thickening at the point of attachment to the rachis. It showsnbsp;also the slightly spreading veins, which throughout the greaternbsp;part of each pinna follow a course approximately parallel to thenbsp;long axis of the pinna.

quot;Well-preserved examples of the stem of Williamsonia gig as are rarely met with ; the figure represents the only specimen innbsp;the British Museum Collection in which any surface-features arenbsp;shown. A similar specimen may be seen in the Woodwardiannbsp;Museum, Cambridge (Leckenby Coll., Ho. 203). The persistent leaf-bases are shown as spirally disposed projecting areas recalling thenbsp;appearance of recent Cj�cadean stems; the concave termination atnbsp;the top of the specimen probably represents the position ofnbsp;a flowering axis such as we know were borne by the stems ofnbsp;Williamsonia. The stem measures 9 em. in length and 5'5 innbsp;breadth. Fragments of fronds and flowers arc associated with thisnbsp;piece of stem, and on the reverse side of the specimen there isnbsp;a good example of a disc like that of 38,785 (PL VIII. Fig. 1).

A part only of the specimen is represented in the fignire ; there is not enough of the frond preserved to enable one to be quitenbsp;sure as to its identity with Williamsonia gigas or Oto%amitesnbsp;acuminatus ; but the rounded edges of the pinnm bases and thenbsp;absence of any definite Otozamites � car � point to Zamites asnbsp;the generic type rather than to Otozamites. Cf. Otozamitesnbsp;Klipsteini (Dunk.) as figured in pi. vii. of the Wealden Flora.^

difference in form and manner of attachment of the apical, median, and basal pinnae. The longer central pinnae have a length ofnbsp;7�5 cm., those at the base are about 3'5 cm. long, -while the apicalnbsp;pinnae are longer, more linear, and less pointed.

V. 3507. Good fronds -with broad pinnse sho-�dng clearly preseiwed venation; the pinnae are oblique to the matrix, andnbsp;therefore appear narrower than they really are, and at first sightnbsp;they suggest an Otozamites rather than a Zamites typo. Purchased.

V. 3942. A frond 53 cm. long. This specimen is preserved in sandstone, and docs not sho-w the details so clearly as many ofnbsp;the other examples of this species, but it affords a good illustration-of the danger of reljdng too much on the published figures ofnbsp;fossil fronds. If this frond were drawn as it appears on thenbsp;sandstone, the pinnae would seem to have broad basal portionsnbsp;rapidly tapering towards the apex ; in reality the breadth of the-pinnae is fairly uniform to within a short distance of the apex, butnbsp;owing to the oblique position of the pinnae in the sandstone matrix,nbsp;a considerable portion of the lower edges is hidden and would notnbsp;be seen in a drawing or photograph.

38.760. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;A splendid frond 45 cm. in length, including thenbsp;petiole, which measures 4-5 cm., widening towards the base.nbsp;This frond is irnusually complete, showing both the apical andnbsp;basal pinnae. The tips of the pinnae are seen to vary considerably:nbsp;in some the upper and lower margins bond gradually downwardsnbsp;and upwards respectively towards the symmetrically placednbsp;acuminate apex; in some the apex points upwards; and in othersnbsp;the lower margin of the pinnae is almost straight, while thenbsp;upper margin bends strongly downwards and gives the apex the-appearance of pointing slightly downwards.

38.761. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Good examples of fronds associated with a flowernbsp;of oval form and closely invested by linear bracts, many of whichnbsp;show the obliquely set ramenta, which are frequently met with:nbsp;on the bracts of WilUamsonia gigas.

39,093. Portions of fronds. On the same piece of rock there is a good impression of a largo Ji]qimetites stem, probably ]S. Beani, innbsp;which the leaf-sheaths are clearly preserved.'

Other specimens:�V. 2115 (fronds associated with fragments of flowers), V. 2887 (pieces of fronds and a peduncle), V. 3508,nbsp;V. 3511, V. 3928, 38,779, 39,200, 39,295 (of. Saporta�s figures ofnbsp;Zamites claravallensis'^ and Z. Feneonis^).

V. 2723�. PI. VII. Fig. 2 (and PI. V.).

The figured specimen, which occurs in association with the frond shown in PI. V., consists of a flowering axis or peduncle, 16 cm.nbsp;long, covered with compressed bracts bearing ramenta ; thenbsp;peduncle has a diameter of about 3 cm. The summit of the axisnbsp;was originally occupied by a flower or bud, of which the basalnbsp;portion only has been preserved. One of the best specimens ofnbsp;a branch of this kind I have met with is in the Leeds Museum.

Fig. 1 represents part of a peduncle of the same type as that shown in Fig. 2, but preserved in such a manner as to show thenbsp;individual linear bracts, which are identical in surface-markingsnbsp;and shape with the involucral bracts of a flower. The central ornbsp;axial part of the peduncle has not been preserved; the figurednbsp;portion shows the cavity originally occupied by the axis, surroundednbsp;by very clearly preserved scale-leaves which thickly covered itsnbsp;surface. In Fig. 3 one of the scale-leaves (x in Fig. 1) is shown onnbsp;a larger scale : it has the form of a hollow shell with a compressednbsp;lozenge-shaped central portion, which was originally occupied bynbsp;the ground tissue and vascular bundles ; the shell no doubtnbsp;represents the more resistent sclerenchymatous hypoderm, thenbsp;surface-striations being the expression of the longitudinal course ofnbsp;the bands of mechanical tissue which occurred below the epidermis..

Portions of two other peduncles occur on the same piece of rock ; also a very good specimen of a Williamsonia � head � ornbsp;flower. The flower shows the central pyriform and tapering-cavity surrounded at the base hy the characteristic zone markednbsp;hy radiating lines, and enclosed by numerous linear bracts. Thenbsp;specimen is practically identical with that represented in pi. lii.nbsp;fig. 6 of 'Williamson�s Memoir.�

In Text - fig. 29 we have a sketch of the broken end of the axis of the peduncle, shown in Fig. 1, PI. quot;VII., as seen innbsp;looking upwards along the cavity left on the removal of the

lower part of the peduncle. In the upper portion (c in Fig. 1, PI. YII.) the axis itself has been preserved, and the truncatednbsp;end is shown in the Text-figure ; the axial portion is ellipticalnbsp;in shape, and is surrounded by the linear scale-leaves, which innbsp;Fig. 1 arc seen in surface-view; these bracts are represented innbsp;the Text-figure by somewhat crushed shells of hypodermal tissuenbsp;enclosing spaces bounded on the outside by convex walls, andnbsp;internally, where the bracts are in contact with the axis, by morenbsp;or less straight walls, as shown in the upper part of the figure.

These two specimens, one the reverse of the other, illustrate the form, of an unusually large example of that part of the floralnbsp;organ which Williamson named the carpellary disc; the same

structure has also heen figured by Saporta as � unc expansion infundibuliforme.�'

The disc was originally circular, as wo know from other specimens, the centre being shown at the base of the figure innbsp;PI. VIII. As seen in surface-view, the disc has the form ofnbsp;a cup-shaped, irregularly striated, carbonaceous membrane, breakingnbsp;up at the periphery into several long and tapering bracts. Thenbsp;continuous portion of the disc has a diameter of 8-5 cm. It isnbsp;probable that this organ was originally attached to the summitnbsp;of a Williamsonia flower, but we have no satisfactory evidencenbsp;as to its function.'* Portions of fronds occur on the same piecenbsp;of rock as the disc shown in Fig. 1, PI. VIII.

V. 2507. Imperfect flowers, in which the scale-leaves show the irregular and occasionally anastomosing ridges, which are nonbsp;doubt due to the presence of strands of hypodermal stereome.

V. 2887�. A peduncle, 18 cm. long, covered with imperfect scale-leaves and terminating in a bud enclosed by scale-leavesnbsp;identical with the involucral bracts of the detached flowers,nbsp;�lumerous pinnae occur on the same piece of rook.

13,512. The impression of a disc with peripheral bracts, similar to the example shown in PI. VIII. Fig. 1 (38,785).

Other specimens:�V. 2609, V. 3513 (fragments of flowers and fronds), 39,087, 39,094, 39,304, 40,556, 52,559.

2. Williamsonia pecten (Phillips).

(PI. II. Pig. 7; Pl. III.; Text-figs. 30-35.)

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cycadites pecten, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pl. vii. fig. 22.

1834. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pterophylluni pecten, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. ii. pl. cii.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pterophyllum pecten, Unger, Gen. spec, plant. foss. p. 289.

Cf. Otozamites gramineus, var. Mundm, Morris, Quart. Joum. Geol. Soc. vol. vi. pl. xxvi. fig. 7.

1852. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;? Pterophyllum imhricatum, Ettingshausen, Abh. k.-k. geoL Eeichs.

1853. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pterophyllum rigidmn, Andrae, Foss. flor. Sieben. pl. xi. fig. 1.nbsp;Zamites gracilis, ibid. pl. xi. figs. 4 and 5.

1863. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;? Palmozamia acutifolia, Oldhani amp; Morris, Pal. Ind. pis. xx. and xxi.

1864. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Palccozamia pecten, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soo. vol. xx. p. 77,

Williamsonia pecten, Carrutbers, Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxvi. p. 694. W. pecten, 'Williamson, ibid. p. 674.

.1873. Pterophyllum pecten, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. ii. p. 15, pl. xxix. figs. 1 and 2.

1874. P Zamites speciosus. Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. iii. (2), pl. xvi. fig. 4. .1875. Pterophyllum pecten, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 226, pl. vii. fig. 22.nbsp;Otozamites gracilis, ibid. p. 224, lign. 52.

1876. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;? Ptilophy��iim cutcheme, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. pis, iv.-vi.

1877. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;? Ftilozamites acutifolia, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. (77'), pl. xl. p. 65;

1879. Palaozamia acutifolium, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. (79), pis. x. etc. Ptilophyllnm cutcheme, ibid. pis. ii. and ix.

1881. Otozamites angmtifolms. Heer, Seco. Trab. Geol. Portugal, pl. ix. fig. 12.

Cf. Ptilophyllum oligoneuron. Jack amp; Etheridge, Geol. Queensland, pl. xvi. fig. 2; pl. xviii. fig. 11.

1900. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;WUUaimoniapccten, Seward, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. vol. xliv.

Frond pinnate, long and narrow ; uniform in breadtli and variable as regards tbe shape and size of the pinnse. The crowdednbsp;pinnse are attached to the upper face of the rachis at a morenbsp;or less acute angle ; the bases of the pinnse are either of thenbsp;same breadth as the rest of the lamina and have rounded cornersnbsp;or, in some cases, the upper edge of the base is slightly expandednbsp;as a basal lobe similar to the auriculate base of an Otozamitesnbsp;pinna. The pinnse vary in shape: some are short and comparativelynbsp;broad, while others are long and narrow (vide Pl. III.), theirnbsp;apices are either gradually tapering and acuminate, or the uppernbsp;margin may be almost straight and the lower edge suddenly curvednbsp;upwards to the pointed tip. The veins are spreading at the basenbsp;of the pinna and approximately parallel through the greater part ofnbsp;the lamina. The petiole is slightly expanded laterally towards thenbsp;base, which separates by a clean-cut absciss-layer from the stemnbsp;(vide Pl. III. Fig. 7).

The flowers appear to be of the same type as those of W�Uiamsonia gigas, but of smaller size, and characterized by thenbsp;shorter and proportionately broader linear acuminate or lanceolatenbsp;bracts. The York Museum contains a specimen very similar tonbsp;that shown in Text-fig. 32.

Although, the pinnate fronds, which were named hy Lindley amp; Hutton Cyeadites pecten and C. pectinoides, have never heennbsp;found in organic union with the type of Williamsonia describednbsp;by Nathorst as W. Lechenbyi,^ there can he little, if any, doubtnbsp;that the latter is the flower of the plant which bore the well-known pinnate leaves long known hy Phillips� name Pterophyllumnbsp;pecten. The constant association of the small species of Williamsonianbsp;with these fronds is in itself a strong argument for their specificnbsp;identity. The extremely variable form of the fronds is at oncenbsp;apparent if we examine carefully the numerous examples ofnbsp;this species in the various British and Continental collections.nbsp;In addition to the specimens in the British Museum illustratingnbsp;the frequent association of various forms of Williamsonia pecten onnbsp;one piece of shale, equally instructive examples may he seen innbsp;the Museums of Scarborough, York, and Manchester. One slabnbsp;of rock in the Scarborough Museum shows about thirty frondsnbsp;in which there is considerable variation in the breadth of thenbsp;pinnm. Specimens in the Manchester Museum also demonstratenbsp;the variability of the species : one frond 24 cm. in length hearsnbsp;pinnae with bluntly rounded bases and the upper basal edgenbsp;distinctly lobed (auriculatc) (cf. V. 3516, etc.), and in closenbsp;association with this occur other examples in which the pinnasnbsp;are smaller and without a basal lobe. The fossils originallynbsp;named by Brongniart Zamia Goldicei, and afterwards figured bynbsp;Saporta as Otozamites Goldimi^ are, I have no doubt, specificallynbsp;identical with Williamsonia pecten ; but the latter name is verynbsp;much better known, and the form of frond to which thenbsp;designation pecten was first applied represents the more typicalnbsp;form. A Liassic Otozamites described by Lignier from Normandynbsp;as 0. Apperti � may also be compared with Williamsonia pectennbsp;the pinnm are slightly lobed at the base, and, as Lignier pointsnbsp;out, they resemble Otozamites Goldmi.

An important question is the affinity of several Cycadean fronds from Indian beds, which Teistmantel included in the genusnbsp;Ptilopliyllum, proposed by Morris in 1840, with the English frondsnbsp;usually referred Pterophyllum, and now spoken of as Williamsonia

pecteii. Morris defined Ptilophyllum as follows: �Fronds pinnate, pinnse closely approximated, linear, lanceolate, more or lessnbsp;elongate, imbricate at the base, attached obliquely; base semicircular or rounded; veins equal, slender, parallel.�' In thisnbsp;diagnosis there is nothing to justify a separation from the type'nbsp;represented by IVilliamsonia pecten. I have no hesitation innbsp;expressing the opinion that there is practically no differencenbsp;between such fronds as Ptilophyllum eutcheme, Morr., P, tenerrimum.nbsp;Feist., P. acutifolium, Morr., and WilUmisonia pecten.

A careful examination of Morris� typo-specimen of Ptilophyllum eutcheme (in the Museum of the Geological Society of London),nbsp;and of several other Indian specimens in the British Museum, hasnbsp;convinced me that a generic separation of the Indian and Europeannbsp;fossils serves to mislead and indicates a distinction which doesnbsp;not exist. It is by no means certain that the two sets of fossilsnbsp;arc specifically identical; probably they are not, but there is atnbsp;least no difference worthy of generic rank. In several instancesnbsp;there has been a tendency to exaggerate the difference betweennbsp;the Gondwana floras and the floras of corresponding age in Europe.

The occurrence of Willimmonia flowers in the Indian beds, and the existence of Cj�oadean stems like that shown in Text-fig. 30,nbsp;demonstrate the close correspondence, as regards some membersnbsp;of the Cycadales, between Indian and European plants duringnbsp;the Mesozoic period. The specimen shown in Text-fig. 30 is ofnbsp;interest as affording an example of a stem from India, whichnbsp;presents a very close agreement with a typical Cycadean trunk.nbsp;The surface of the trunk (A) is covered with persistent leaf-bases,nbsp;to which fronds of the tj�pe Ptilophyllum eutcheme were attached;nbsp;in a section of the stem (B) a large pith is seen to occupy the axialnbsp;region, and this is surrounded by a zone of secondary wood, whichnbsp;appears to differ from the characteristic wood of existing Cycadsnbsp;in having a more compact structure. The broad parenchymatousnbsp;medullarj'-raj's form a striking feature in the wood of a recentnbsp;Cycad, but in the Indian stem, so far as it is possible to examinenbsp;the structure in detail, the medullary-rays arc narrow, and morigt;nbsp;like those of Conifers than Cycads. The lozongo-shaped areas

external to the axis of the stem (Text-fig. 30, B) represent the sections of petioles, some of which are seen in Fig. 30, A, attachednbsp;to the stem.

B. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Transverse section, showing the a.xis of the stem and numerous leaves.

I hope to describe elsewhere, and in more detail, the �structure of this Indian fossil, which is of considerable interestnbsp;as throwing light on the nature of the stems which bore somenbsp;of the best known Cycadean fronds. Before describing thenbsp;English specimens of Williamsonia pecten, a brief account may he

Fig. 31.-�� Fterophyllum rigidum,� And. (= 1 Williamsonia pecten), from Steierdorf, Banat. From a specimen in the British Museum. No. 41,438.

given of a few foreign examples, which are of importance as affording evidence in favour of the close similarity or identity ofnbsp;the Yorkshire species and well-known types of fronds from Indianbsp;and Austria.

The figure represents a small piece of a frond from Steierdorf named by Andrae Pterophyllum rigidum; ^ it has the same form as

Fig. 32.�^ Ptilophyllum cutehense,' Morr., from the Eajmahal Hills, India. B. Basal pinnae. No. V. 2609�.

the specimens of Williamsonia pecten shown in PL III. Fig. 4 and in PI. III. Fig. 6, hut there is no indication of any auriculatenbsp;upper edge at the base of the pinnae. The veins in Andrae�snbsp;specimen should have heen drawn rather more spreading or obliquenbsp;to the edge of the lamina in the basal portion of the pinnae. Tliisnbsp;plant, I believe, is specifically identical with WUlimnsonia pecten.

These two drawings represent portions of fronds of the Indian species figured by Morris, Oldham amp; Morris, and Ficstmantel asnbsp;Palccozamia eutchensis or Ptilophyllum cutclieme from the Ilajmahalnbsp;Hills. The small basal pinnae (B) have the upper edge of the basenbsp;free, and agree precisely in this respect with the small basal pinnaenbsp;of Williamsonia pecten (cf. Text-fig. 33). Fig. 32a shows thenbsp;lower portions of a few pinnae attached to the rachis; each pinnanbsp;is l'4cm. long and 3mm. broad; the veins are slightly spreadingnbsp;from the base and diverge at the apex, being repeatedly branchednbsp;as they pass through the lamina. The drawing was made fromnbsp;one of several fronds preserved in unusual perfection in a siliceousnbsp;rock, where they occur in association with Dictyozamites.'

There is a close resemblance between the Portuguese frond from Cape Mondego figured by Morris ^ and by Heer � respectively asnbsp;Otozamites graniineus, var. Mundoi, and Otozamites angustifoUus,nbsp;and some of the examples of Williamsonia pecten; the original ofnbsp;the drawing given by Morris and copied bjquot; Heer is in the Britishnbsp;Museum Collection (41,371). It is not improbable that the Englishnbsp;specimens from the Stoncsficld Slate named b3� Lindlej� amp; Huttonnbsp;Zamia taxina are specifically identical with the East Yorkshirenbsp;plant.

Specimens of Williamsonia pecten arc abundantljquot; represented in collections of English Jurassic plants, more particnlarly in thenbsp;Museums of Scarborough, Cambridge, Newcastle, and Manchester.nbsp;In the Natural History Museum, Paris, there is an example of thisnbsp;species labelled Otozamites Irevifoliiis, from Scarborough, the giftnbsp;of Dr. Mantell.

48,732. PI. III. Fig. 1.

The figure shows a small portion of a specimen 11-5 cm. in length. This affords a good illustration of the narrow form ofnbsp;leaf with very small pinna;, similar to the type figured by Lindleynbsp;and Hutton as Pteropliyllum pecten}

V. 3517. PL III. Fig. 2.

This example illustrates a somewhat different form of frond, in which the pinna; are short and relatively broad; the breadthnbsp;of the specimen, which has a length of 14 cm., is very uniform.nbsp;At the base the pinna; measure 4 mm. in length, and those atnbsp;a higher level have a length of l�3cm. ; the segments havenbsp;rounded bases, and are attached along the middle of the uppernbsp;face of the rachis. A piece of a leaf having much narrower pinnaenbsp;occurs in close association with the example shown in the figure.

V. 3519. PI. III. Fig. 3.

The figure represents the apex of a frond 30 cm. long and 5-5 cm. broad; there are several other leaves of this species onnbsp;the same piece of rook, some of them agreeing with the specimennbsp;shown in Fig. 2. Those pinnae (Fig. 3) are fairly broad, andnbsp;in some of those nearer the lower part of the frond the uppernbsp;�edge of the base is slightly lobed or �eared.� The apices arenbsp;acuminate, the lower edge of the pinnse being more stronglynbsp;�curved towards the tip than the upper. There is a closenbsp;resemblance between the apex of the frond, as shown in thenbsp;figure, and that of Otozamites gramineus, Phill.,^ but in Phillips�nbsp;specimen (now in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge, No. 216)nbsp;the pinna; are of the Otozamites type. Several other fronds occurnbsp;on the same slab with that of Fig. 3. Labelled by Bean Otopterisnbsp;lanceolata.

39,284. PI. III. Figs. 4 and 5.

Fig. 4 represents a small ]3iece of a frond which occurs on a large slah of rook in association with between thirty and fortynbsp;other examples, of which the pinna3 vary considerably in size andnbsp;shape. The upper edge of the base of the long and narrow pinnaenbsp;shown in Fig. 4 is slightly lobed, but in some of the pinn� thenbsp;auriculate base is much more evident. The veins are somewhatnbsp;spreading at the base, and inclined at an oblique angle to the uppernbsp;margin of the pinnae, 'but their general course is parallel to thenbsp;long axis of the segments. Cf. PteropJiyllum rigidum as figurednbsp;by Andrae,^ and Text-fig. 31.

In Fig. 5, PI. III. we have a form of frond similar to that shown in Fig. 1, but this specimen no doubt represents a youngnbsp;leaf which is not fully expanded, and in which the segmentsnbsp;are slightly imbricate in their arrangement, as in the fronds ofnbsp;many recent Cycads. Similar examples of young and narrownbsp;fronds, showing an imbricate vernation, maj- be seen in thenbsp;Museum of Practical Geology, Jermyn Street, London, and innbsp;the Newcastle Collection. Some of the fronds associated withnbsp;the figured specimens are of the type shown in Fig. 2; others are.

identical -with the typo named hy Bean Otopteri� lanceolatus, and hy Phillips Otozamites gracilis} Cf. Fig. 5 and a dra^ving ofnbsp;PtilopliyUum cwtchense given by Feistmautel ^ in pi. xii. fig. 4nbsp;of his Flora of Kach.

1 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Phillips (75), p. 224. The original of Phillips� figure is in the I.eekenbynbsp;Collection, Cambridge.

The base of a petiole, shoving the clean-cut surface along which the absciss layer was formed, cutting oS the leaf from the persistentnbsp;portion of the petiole which remained attached to the stem. Thenbsp;broad part of the leaf-stalk immediately above the base presentsnbsp;a characteristic wrinkled appearance.

V. 3795. Several good fronds with very broad pinna; of the form shown in Figs. 3 and 6, PI. III. The larger fronds are sonbsp;placed on this slab of rock as if converging towards a common point,nbsp;suggesting their original arrangement when attached to the stem.nbsp;In one corner of the rock there are portions of much smaller frondsnbsp;with narrower pinna; attached to an imperfectly preserved stem.nbsp;The foot-rule placed against the slab of shale shows the actual sizenbsp;of the fronds. Also fragments of BracJiypliyllum maniillare.

Part of a frond 8 cm. long. This specimen illustrates the broad type of pinna in which the base does not appear to be auriculate.

V. 2510. A large slab with several fronds of W. pecten and some twigs of Brachyphyllum mamillare. Labelled by Beannbsp;Otopteris lanceolata; this species, instituted by Phillips, is in allnbsp;probability identical with 0. acuniinatus, and has nothing to donbsp;with W. pecten.

V. 2619. A frond 24 cm. long and 1-5 cm. broad, bearing closely crowded, obliquely set, narrow pinna;. Cf. 2889a.

V. 2889a. Several good examples of long and narrow fronds with closely set pinnae; also part of a large frond with pinna;nbsp;in which the base is slightly auriculate at its upper edge.

V. 3282. Two. large slabs with numerous fronds illustrating the variation in the size and form of the pinnae ; some isolatednbsp;bracts of flowers also occur in association with the fronds.

V. 3516. In one frond the pinnae are long and narrow, like those shown in Fig. 4, PI. III., with spreading veins at the base

and sligMly broader and auriculato at the upper edge. Pinnoe 4-� cm. long. Other fronds with shorter and broader pinnoe, morenbsp;like those shown in Pig. 2, PI. III.

V. 3518. Prond similar to that of Pig. 2, PI. III., associated with others having narrower pinnae.

V. 3589. Small frond of the type represented in PL III, Pig. 1 ; the hasal pinnae as in Pig. 32, B.

10,312. Similar to Pig. 6, PI. III.; labelled by Hathorst �Otozamites gracilis.

Other specimens:�V. 2633 (small form), V. 2889 (cf. Pig. 5, PI. III.), V. 2895, V. 3283, V. 3515 (cf. Pig. 1, PI. III.), V. 3590,nbsp;12,405, 39,095, 39,286, 40,522, 46,660, 52,568 (cf. PI. III.nbsp;Pig. 2), 52,939.

V. 3284. PI. III. Pig. 8.

A well-preserved disc showing a prominent central boss and breaking up peripherally into several imperfectly preserved bracts.nbsp;Several fronds in close association with the disc.

A side-view of a disc similar to V. 3284, shown in surface-view in Fig. 8, PI. III. The sides of the central dome-shaped portionnbsp;are marked hy a series of rather prominent ridges, between whichnbsp;occnr pairs of slight depressions, indicated in the drawing hynbsp;black dots representing small patches of carbonaceous matter.

� Depth of the disc from the summit of the dome - shaped projecting portion to the end of the bract = 4 cm.

The surface-view of the base of a flower; a small raised boss occupies the centre, which is surrounded hy a slightly depressednbsp;area succeeded by a raised rim; beyond this the surface is coverednbsp;with a fine reticulum, of which the meshes or polygonal areasnbsp;become more elongated towards the periphery, where they passnbsp;into radiating ridges. Cf. Willimnsonia Carruthersi, Sew.^

39,094. Part of a disc with bracts; the latter shows very clearly the irregular striations similar to those which characterizenbsp;the bracts in Williammiia gigas, and due, no doubt, to the presencenbsp;of strands of hypodermal strengthening tissue.

39,296. Two discs and fifteen marginal bracts. Cf. Williamsonia gigas (PI. YIII. Fig. 1). Portions of fronds occur on the samenbsp;piece of rook.

Frond comparatively small, linear, or tongue - shaped, usually divided into segments which present a more or less obviousnbsp;difference in breadth, separate or confluent at the base, attachednbsp;laterally to the raohis, and never entirely covering the upper facenbsp;of the frond axis ; the segments bluntly rounded or truncatenbsp;distally; veins simple and parallel, generally at right angles tonbsp;the rachis.

The clifEerences hetweea this genus and Pterophyllum and Nilssonia were discussed in the second volume of the Wealdennbsp;Flora, and need not be considered here.

There is, however, one point of importance as regards the probable systematic position of Anomozamites. Nathorst has givennbsp;a description of some specimens which afford trustworthy evidencenbsp;of the association of a Williamsonia type of flower with Anomozamites fronds.^ The restoration which he gives of the plantnbsp;indicates a habit different from that of Williamsonia gigas; thenbsp;stem is repeatedly branched dichotomously, and in each fork therenbsp;is a single flower of Williamsonia angnstifolia, Nath.,^ the frondsnbsp;being of the type Anomozainites minor (Brongn.). The specimensnbsp;on which the restoration is based are in the Palaeohotanicalnbsp;Museum, Stockholm ; an examination of them a few years agonbsp;led me to agree with Professor Nathorst in his interpretation ofnbsp;the habit of the plant. Nathorst�s evidence enables us, therefore,nbsp;to include Anomozamites as another momber of the Bennettiteae,nbsp;closely allied to Williamsonia gigas in the form of the reproductivenbsp;organs, hut differing from that type, as also from Williamsonianbsp;pecten, in the form of the fronds and in the habit of the stem.

The linear shape of the leaf of Anomozamites and the unequal segments suggest a comparison with the fronds of Polypodiumnbsp;irioides, Lam.; it is of some interest to find that more than onenbsp;type of Mesozoic Cycadean frond may he fairly closely matchednbsp;with the leaves of recent ferns. These resemblances, although ofnbsp;no very great value in themselves, are of interest as additionalnbsp;links connecting the Cycadales and Pilices, which it is believednbsp;represent phyla of the plant kingdom descended from a commonnbsp;stock of remote antiquity.

The resemblance between Anomozamites and Pterophyllum has led Potonie^ to unite the two genera, regarding the former asnbsp;a synonym of the latter ; lor the present, at least, it is probablynbsp;the better plan to retain both generio terms.

Anomozamites Nilssoni (Phillips).

1833. Pterophyllum Nilssoni, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pl. Ixvii. fig. 2.

1848. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pterophyllum majus, ^ var. minus, Bronn, Ind. Pal. p. 1056.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pterophtjllum minus, Unger, Gen. spec, plant. foss. p. 292.

1867. Cf. Pterophyllum inconstans, Schenk, Flor. Grenzsch. pl. xxxvii. figs. 5-10.

1873. Pterophyllum Nilssoni, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. ii. p. 22, pl. xxix. fig. 3.

1888. Cf. Anomozamites minor, Nathorst, Ofvers. k. Vet. Akad. Forh. 1888, p. 362.

Proud linear or broadly lanceolate; the lamina may be almost entire or divided into distally truncate segments varying considerablynbsp;in breadth; the apex is obtuse, and the lamina is usually entire atnbsp;the distal end of the frond. The veins are more or less at rightnbsp;angles to the rachis, and are either simple or dichotomouslynbsp;branched; the branching may occur close to the rachis or in anynbsp;part of the lamina.

Phillips� figure, which is somewhat crude, represents the type-specimen half the natural size; the veins are indistinct. Some forms of Anomozamites Nilssoni exhibit a fairly close agreementnbsp;with the fronds of Nilssonia compta, but the segments of thenbsp;latter species are usually more oblique to the axis of the frond, and

their apices are more sharply pointed and less truncate than the divisions of the lamina in Anomozmnites Nilssoni.

There are some good specimens of this species in the Museums of Camhridge, Scarborough, and Manchester. One example in

the Scarborough Collection is unusually perfect; the frond has a length of 12 cm., and in the middle the leaf is 1-9 cm. broad;nbsp;the veins are very indistinctly shown, as is frequently the casenbsp;in leaves of this species.

The fronds figured by Nathorst from the Rhsetic of Sweden as Ammozamites gracilis � appear to he very similar to those ofnbsp;A. Nilssoni, but they are probably not specifically identical.

This specimen illustrates the striking inequality in the segments; at the apex the lamina is entire and obtusely pointed; in thenbsp;middle and basal portions the lamina is broken up into segmentsnbsp;resembling in shape those of Nilssonia compta, but differing innbsp;their finer texture as well as in their straighter terminations,nbsp;in the less curved upper edge, and in the venation. The veinsnbsp;in this specimen are not shown quite accurately in the figure;nbsp;if examined closely they are seen to fork fairly often, as innbsp;Tainiopteris. Labelled by Bean Pterophjllum Nilssoni.

10,313. A leaf showing a more tapered and pointed apex than in 39,306 (Text-fig. 36). Veins hardly visible.

39,307. Leaf 19cm. long; also a smaller leaf on the same piece of shale. The veins are clearly seen, forking either closenbsp;to their origin or in different parts of the lamina.

52,568. An impression of a single leaf in sandstone, associated with a very good specimen of Ginhgo digitata.

An account of the history of this genus was given in the second volume of the Wealden Flora} We have no evidence as to thenbsp;nature of the reproductive organs of Oto%amites, but it may benbsp;safely regarded as a Cycadean plant bearing a closer resemblancenbsp;to ferns in the form and venation of the pinnules than is thenbsp;case with the majority of recent species of the Cycadacess.

Otopteris mediana, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 78, pi. X. fig. 2.

BiAymoehlmna Beani, Ettiugshausen, Farnk. Jetztwelt, p. 216. Otopteris Beani, Scbimper, Trait, pal. veg. vol. i. p. 483.

Type-specimens. Type of Cyclopteris Beani, L. amp; H., in the-Scarboroiigli Museum; type of Otopteris mediana, Leckenby, in the Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge (No. 235).

Frond pinnate, long, narrow, and of uniform breadth, tapering gradually towards the slender aiiex. Pinnae short and broad,nbsp;varying in shape from broadly oval with bluntly rounded apices tonbsp;deltoid or suborbicular in the lower part of the frond (PI. I. Fig. 4),nbsp;and narrower, longer, and more lanceolate in the distal portion ofnbsp;the frond (PI. I. Fig. 3). The pinnte are alternate and in partnbsp;imbricate, attached by the lower part of the auriculate base tonbsp;the upper face of the rachis, which is usually hidden by thenbsp;overlapping auricnlate bases of the pinnas. Veins numerous,nbsp;repeatedly forked and spreading from the base.

The specimen which Leckenby referred to a distinct species, Otopteris mediana (No. 235 in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge),nbsp;is, I believe, specifically identical with 0. Beani, L. amp; H. Innbsp;a note written on a specimen in the Leckenby Collection Nathorstnbsp;also expresses this opinion. A somewhat similar type of Otozamitesnbsp;is represented by the quot;Wealden species, 0. Klipsteini (Dunk.), ofnbsp;which the British Museum possesses a fine series.'

This is one of the most striking species among the Yorkshire plants ; it is usually placed among the Cycads, but in the absencenbsp;of any information as to cither stems or flowers we have nonbsp;proof of its Cycadean nature. It is in all probability correctlynbsp;included in the Cycadales ; the form of the leaves recalls thatnbsp;of recent Cycads, but there is no living species of which thenbsp;pinna; bear more than a distant resemblance to those of Otozamitesnbsp;Beani. It is interesting to find a close agreement between thenbsp;fronds of this fossil form and those of a recent fern. Anemianbsp;rotmdifolia, Schrad.; the habit of the leaf, the shape and venation

of the fem, exhibit a greater likeness to Otozamites Beani than is presented by any recent Cycad. 'While believing this Jurassicnbsp;plant to be a member of the Cycadales, I would draw attentionnbsp;to the fact that the fronds exhibit more marked fern - likenbsp;characters than are found in recent Cycadean leaves. Thenbsp;Palseozoic Cycadofilices have made us familiar with the union ofnbsp;Filicinean and Cycadean features, and traces of the commonnbsp;origin of the Ferns and Cycads are exhibited by the Mesozoicnbsp;genus Bennettites. In the frond of Otozamites Beani we have,nbsp;I believe, a further indication among Jurassic Cycadean plantsnbsp;of the close relationship of Ferns and Cycads, which is morenbsp;faintly revealed in the recent species of these two groups.nbsp;Among recent Cycadean fronds which bear most resemblance tonbsp;Otozamites Beani may be mentioned Zamia furfuracea, Ait., andnbsp;allied forms.

40,568. PI. II. Fig. 3.

A large slab of shale with two fronds about 20 cm. long, and parts of others. The longest pinna has a length of 3�5 cm.nbsp;and a breadth of 1�7 cm. The pinnse are attached to the uppernbsp;face of the rachis by the lower edge of the base, the lobednbsp;upper edge being free and often overlapping the next highernbsp;pinna; the veins are well marked, spreading from the point ofnbsp;attachment, and frequently forked. The pinnse shown in thenbsp;figure have somewhat more pointed apices than in some ofnbsp;the specimens of this species. Cf. Zigno�s figures ^ (pis. xxxv.nbsp;and xxxvi.) of 0. Molinianus, Zign.

39,214. PI. I. Fig. 4.

The basal part of a frond, bearing deltoid pinnae with upward-directed tips; the basal pinnae are broader in proportionnbsp;to their length than those shown in Fig. 3. These pinnse arenbsp;broader than the corresponding pinnse in Zigno�s specimens ofnbsp;Otozamites Molinianus.

The whole frond, preserved in sandstone, has a length of 21 cm., the apical portion only being shown in the drawing; the lowernbsp;pinnee measure 2-5 cm. in length and I'Scm. in breadth; theynbsp;differ slightly from those in 40,568 in having somewhat lessnbsp;pointed distal ends. The apex of the frond hears a fairly closenbsp;resemblance to that of Otozamites Klipsteini, of Vealden age.�^

13,500. A good impression in sandstone, showing a petiole 9 cm. long; of the same form as 40,568. Cf. Otozamites Canossconbsp;as figured by Zigno, pi. xxxvii. figs. 3 and 4.

la. Otozamites, sp., cf. O. Beani (L. amp; H.).

The portion of a frond shown in Fig. 37 is from the specimen figured by Young amp; Bird, and now in the Whitby Museum. It

is difficult to determine its exact position, hut the specimen is interesting as the oldest figured example of a British Otozamitesnbsp;frond.

39,278. Text-fig. 38.

This fragment, labelled by Bean Pachypteris lanceolata, probably belongs to a frond of Otozamites Beani. Compare the terminalnbsp;portion of a frond figured by Bindley amp; Hutton.'

Oolitic Shale, Saltwick. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Bean Coll,

2. Otozamites Bunburyanus, Zigno.

(PI. II. Figs. 4 and 5.)

1864. Otoptens tenuata, Leckenby, ex Bean MS., Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. XX. p. 79, pi. ix. flg. 3.

1868. Otozamites Bimburyanus, Zigno, Cicad. foss. Oolit. p. 9, figa. 4 and 5. 1870. Otozamites Bunburyanus, Scbimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. ii. p. 174.nbsp;1875. Otozamites tenuatm, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 221, lign. 46.

1879. P Otozamites Bunburyanus, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. pi. vii. figs. 5-8 ; pi. xvi. fig. 2.

1881. Otozamites Bunburyanus, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. ii. p. 102, pi. xxxviii.

1891. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Otozamites Bunburyanus, Saporta, Pal. Frani;. pi. ccxoviii. fig. 1.

Type-specimen. Type of Leckenby�s Otozamites tenuatus in the Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge (Ho. 232).

Frond pinnate ; pinme orbicular, alternate, attached to the upper face of the racbis, wbicb is bidden by the imbricate auriculated

upper edges of the bases of the pinnae. Veins spreading from the bases of the segments, as in Otozamites Beani.

Otozamites Bunburyanus agrees in many respects with 0. Beani, but differs in the smaller size and more rounded or orbicular formnbsp;of the pinnae ; the long narrow fronds may be compared withnbsp;fhose of certain ferns, e.g. Nephrolepis Buffii. Some of thenbsp;Italian specimens referred by Zigno^ to Otozamites Trevisani maynbsp;be compared with 0. Bunburyanus. The reproductive organs andnbsp;stems are unknown, but in all probability this plant representsnbsp;another example of the combination of Cycadcan and Filicineannbsp;characters.

The frond figured by Brongniart^ from a French locality as Filicites Besnoyersii and afterwards as Pecopteris Besnoyersii^ maynbsp;be compared with Otozamites Bunburyanus, but the two plantsnbsp;arc probably not spocificallj^ identical.

The Museums of Cambridge (Leckenby Coll.), York, and Manchester contain interesting spiecimens of this species.

The figures represent portions of two fronds. The specimen shows several fronds converging towards one point, suggestingnbsp;their preservation in a position similar to that which they occupiednbsp;when attached to the stem. The pinnae, orbicular or suborbicularnbsp;in shape, vary but slightly in size in a length of frond of 12 cm.nbsp;The rachis is broad, and bears the pinnae obliquely attached tonbsp;its upper face; in some places the pinnae are distinctly imbricate,nbsp;in others separate. The veins are clearly shown spreading fromnbsp;the base and occasionally forked. The fronds vary in breadthnbsp;from '6 to '9 cm.

1824. Filicites Bucklandi, var. gallica, Brongniart, Ann. Sci. nat. vol. iv, p. 422, pi. xix. fig. 3.

1864. Otoptens gmphica, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 78, pi. viii. fig. S.

Prond pinnate; pinnse more or less falcate, attacked alternately to the upper surface of the rachis, characterized by the stronglynbsp;auriculatc upper edge of the base; veins spreading in the basalnbsp;portion of the segments and slightly oblique to the upper edge ofnbsp;the rest of the lamina ; apices acuminate and directed upwards.

The species Otopteris graphica is mentioned by Bronn ^ in 1848 �and by Morris^ in 1854, but these authors refer to the specificnbsp;name instituted by Bean in manuscript, without publication;nbsp;the first description and illustration of the species under Bean�snbsp;name is in Leckenby�s paper of 1864. The fragment figured bynbsp;Brongniart as Filicites BmklmAi, var. gallica, from Mamers, ofnbsp;Bathonian age, is probably specifically identical with the morenbsp;perfect frond figured by Leckenby ; this view is adopted bynbsp;Saporta and Sohimper. Considering the fragmentary nature ofnbsp;Brongniart�s specimen it is safer to regard Leckenby�s specimennbsp;as the type of the species and to retain the name originallynbsp;pi�oposcd by Bean.

Some of the Rhsetic fronds figured by Schenk as Otopteris Bucklandi ^ very closely resemble Otozamites graphicus, and affordnbsp;connecting links between that species and 0. ohtusus.

A specimen in the Scarborough Museum, which is no doubt identical with this species, has been named by Richards *nbsp;Oto%amites Plnllipsii, but no description of the species has beennbsp;published. Good examples are contained in the collections atnbsp;Whitby and Cambridge. Specimens of Otozamifes grapMcua arenbsp;occasionally met with labelled 0. acuminatus, but the falcate formnbsp;of the pinnae and their more regular oblique attachment to thenbsp;rachis afford distinguishing features.

A portion of a frond 11 cm. in length. The figure shows the upwardly directed and pointed tips, the strongly falcate form, andnbsp;the well-marked lobes and spreading veins which characterize thenbsp;pinnae of this species.

This smaller example is in all probability specifically identical with the larger frond (40,515); the comparatively short, morenbsp;falcate, and pointed pinnse constitute a difference between thisnbsp;specimen and the frond of similar size referred to Otozamites,nbsp;obtusm, var. oolitims, as represented in PI. II. Fig. 2.

4. Otozamites acuminatus (Lindloy amp; Hutton).

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cycadites latifolius, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 154, pi. x. fig. 1.

18.34. Otopteris acuminata (pars), Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. pi. cxxxii. (the lower figure only).

' Synopsis of the British Fossil Cycadaceous Leaves, p. 5. (Private proof, Edinburgh, 1884.)

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Otozamites acuminata, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, foss. p. 88.

Otoptens acumwata, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77. 0. lanceolata, ibid.

1869. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Otopteris accuminata, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. i. p. 484.nbsp;Otozamites acuminatus^ ibid. vol. ii. p. 176.

Zamites distracties, Saporta, Pal. Fran^. vol. ii. p. 115; pi. xciii-figs. 4 and 5.

1892. Otozamites acuminatus, Fox-Strangways, Tab. Foss. p. 139. d. latifolius, ibid.

Type - specimen. Type of Lindley amp; Hutton, Scarborough 3lluscuni. Type of Otozamites latifolius, York Museum.

Frond pinnate, of similar form to that of Williamsonia gigas, from which it differs in the more gradually tapered and acuminatenbsp;j)innse, and in the wider angle at which the segments are attachednbsp;to the raohis. The apical pinnae are narrow, linear in form, whilenbsp;the basal pinnae are shorter and broader, and more or less ovate,nbsp;with an acuminate apex, attached to the rachis at a slightly obtusenbsp;angle.

It is convenient to designate certain forms of this species in which the pinnae are short and tapering distally to an acuminatenbsp;apex (e.g. PI. II. Fig. 1) 0. acuminatus, var. IrevifoUus, andnbsp;others with broader pinnas O. acuminatus, vai�. latifolius. Thenbsp;former name, var. hrevifolius, was used by Lindley amp; Hutton for

fronds with shorter pinnae; the latter term was adopted by-Phillips as a specific name. The type-specimen of Phillips� species is in the York Museum, and consists of an imperfectly preservednbsp;portion of a frond which cannot he satisfactorily defined asnbsp;a species distinct from O. acuminatus, hut is, I believe, identicalnbsp;with this species. The drawing given by Phillips is by no meansnbsp;accurate; the veins in the pinnae are numerous, and not asnbsp;represented in the figure.

This species hears a close resemblance to Otozamites Beani, and the two types of frond may be almost connected by transitionalnbsp;forms; the longer and narrower acuminate pinnae of Otozamitesnbsp;acuminatus afford the most convenient distinguishing feature.nbsp;Some fronds of WilUamsonia gigas also present a strong likenessnbsp;to those of Otozamites acuminatus ; their resemblance affords onenbsp;of several instances illustrating the difficulty of drawing anynbsp;satisfactory distinction between the Zamites and Otozamites typenbsp;of pinnae. In Otozamites acuminatus the lower pinnae are shorternbsp;and broader than in WilUamsonia gigas, and are frequentlynbsp;attached to the basal portion of the rachis at a slightly obtusenbsp;angle. Good specimens of the species occur in the Museumsnbsp;of Scarborough, Whitby, and Newcastle, also in the Museum ofnbsp;Practical Geology, Jermyn Street, London, and in other collections.

Part of a specimen 15cm. long; labelled by Bean Otozamites acuminatus. The pinnae are attached to the rachis at a widenbsp;angle, and are shorter, broader, and more acuminatoly pointed thannbsp;in WilUamsonia gigas. The bases of the pinna3, as shown in thenbsp;figure, are rounded at the corners and arc hardly typical ofnbsp;Otozamites, but some of the smaller pinnse of this species arenbsp;more definitely lobed and conform more nearly with the recognizednbsp;character of the genus. Cf. Zamites Moreaui, Sap.�

The total length of the specimen is 9�5 cm. This specimen probably represents the basal portion of a frond, as we know from

larger examples that the basal pinnie arc very short in comparison with those in the middle of the frond. The upper corner of thenbsp;bases of the pinnae is slightly auriculate. This example may benbsp;referred to as 0. acuminatus, var. brevifoUtis.

39,199' frond showing shorter basal pinnae similar to those of 40,468 (PI. II. Fig. 1) and longer pinnae similar to those ofnbsp;39,203 (PI. VI. Fig. l). This frond measures 28 cm. in length.

39,202. A specimen 24 cm. long, with shorter and relatively broader pinnae than 39,199. Labelled by Bean Otopteris acuminata.nbsp;This should also be referred to Otozamites acuminatus, var. hrevifolius.

5. Otozamites parallelus, Phillips.

1881. Otozamites Nathorsti, Zigno, Plor. foss. Oolit. vol. ii. p. 93, pi. xxxvii. fig. 1.

Frond pinnate; pinnae short and comparatively broad, attached to the upper face of the rachis at a wide angle, the base isnbsp;slightly auriculate at the upper edge ; veins somewhat spreadingnbsp;at the base, but approximately parallel to the edge of the laminanbsp;through the greater part of their course ; apex of the pinnae obtuse.

This species was defined by Phillips as follows:��Frond very long, narrow, composed of many oval, slightly obtuse leaves, twonbsp;or three times as long as broad, sot perpendicular to the rachis;nbsp;venation radiating from the proximal part of the base of the leaf,nbsp;furcate, and dividing to about forty venules towards the edge.�

I have adopted Phillips� specific name for a few specimens of Otozamites fronds represented in several English collections, whichnbsp;agree verj^ closely with some of the fronds figured by Zigno fromnbsp;Italy, and also closely resemble in the form of their pinnae the

type shown in woodcut 47 of the Geology of Yorkshire. It is questionahle whether the wiser plan would be to make use of onenbsp;of Zigno�s specific names, but as I feel practically no doubt as tO�nbsp;the specific identity of the specimens referred to 0. parallelus andnbsp;the type-specimen of Phillips� species, I have revived the namenbsp;instituted by this author. Some of the smaller forms of Zigno�snbsp;species Oto%miites Molinianus � are, to some extent, intermediate innbsp;form between 0. parallelus and 0. Feistmanteli.

Oto%amites parallelus may be compared also with a similar but probably not identical species, Nilssonia pterophylloides, describednbsp;by Yokoyama from Japan.�¹

This type of frond is represented by a single specimen in the national Collection. The best examples are in the Leckenbynbsp;Collection, Cambridge (Nos. 218, 219), and in the Scarboroughnbsp;Museum.

51,410. A small specimen 10 cm. long and 2�6 cm. broad, specifically identical with some larger examples in the Leckenbynbsp;Collection, Cambridge. The pinnse are short and comparativelynbsp;broad, and the upper edge of the base is slightly eared. Labellednbsp;Otozamites obtusus.

6. Otozamites obtusus (Lindley amp; Hutton), var. ooliticus, mihi.

1825. Filicites Bechii, Brongniart, Ann. Sci. nat. vol. iv. pi. xix. fig. 4. 1828. Zamites Bucklandi, Brongniart, Prodrome, p. 199.

1867. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Otopteris Bucklandi, Schenk, Grenzsch. pis. xxxiii. and xxxiv.

1868. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Of. Zamites approximatus, Eichwald, Leth. B,oss. pi. ii. fig. 8.

Cf. Otozamitespterophylloides, Saporta, Pal. Franc;, p. 157, pis. xxxiv.,. xxxvii., and xxxviii. fig. 1.

1881. Otozamites vicetinus, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. ii. p. 69, pi. xxxiii-figs. 3 and 4.

Type-specimen. The original of pi. cxxx'iii. of the Fossil Fiom-is in the Oxford Museum.

The Inferior Oolite form differs slightly from the type-specimen of Otozamites oltiisus (L. amp; H.)' in the pinnae having slightlynbsp;more acuminate apices, and in the lower margin of the pinnse being-somewhat less abruptly curved upwards. (Cf. the drawing givennbsp;by Lindley amp; Hutton, and PI. I. Pig. 1 and PI. II. Pig. 2 of thisnbsp;Catalogue.)

The form of Cycadean frond represented bj- the type-specimen of Otozamites obtusus from the Lias near Axminster, and now in the-Oxford Museum, is one which is widely spread in Hheetio, Liassic,nbsp;and Oolitic strata. There are several fronds described from thesenbsp;horizons by various authors under different specific names, whichnbsp;it is practically impossible to separate from one another by anynbsp;really distinctive features of taxonomic value. To avoid thenbsp;danger of artificial distinction, suggested by the application ofnbsp;specific names to fronds which agree with one another in their-general form, but differ in slight variations in the form of thenbsp;pinnae, apices, and other inconstant and unimportant characters,nbsp;I propose to use the designation Otozamites ohtusus in a wide sense,nbsp;as denoting a type of frond represented by examples hithertonbsp;considered as distinct species. The very strong likeness betweennbsp;the � species � which centre round Otozamites ohtusus is well illustrated by the lists of sjmonyms given by different authors. Therenbsp;is a want of unanimity in the interpretation of the extremelynbsp;slight differences which may be detected in comparing the frondsnbsp;from Hhsetio, Liassic, and Oolitic horizons, demonstrating thenbsp;absence of any satisfactory distinctive features worthy of specificnbsp;distinction. The differences between young and old fronds of

1 There are several good examples of the Lias form, identical -with the type-specimen of Lindley amp; Hutton, in the British Museum; e.g., Hos. 39,059, 40,692, 47,045, etc.

one and the same plant are, indeed, greater than between some of the so-called species of this type of frond. It is wiser to admitnbsp;that we cannot hope to accurately separate species by such finenbsp;distinctions as have been discovered in the form of the pinnse ofnbsp;fronds from different localities. A slight difference in geologicalnbsp;age is often responsible for the undue importance attached tonbsp;almost imperceptible distinctions, which are raised to the rank ofnbsp;specific characters.

In the list of synonyms I have included such forms as agree most nearly with Oto%amites oMiisus, L. amp; H.; it is not meant to implynbsp;that the several �species� are identical, hut that they are allnbsp;characterized by the possession of fronds conforming in the mainnbsp;to one type; such small differences as may he recognized are notnbsp;considered sufficient to warrant their use as specific characters. Itnbsp;may he convenient to retain some, at least, of the specific names asnbsp;varietal 'or � form � designations. The Inferior Oolite fronds whichnbsp;Phillips spoke of as Otozamiies ohtusus � may he spoken of asnbsp;Otozamites ohtusus (L. amp; H.), var. ooliticus, in order to drawnbsp;a distinction between the Inferior Oolite fronds and the closelynbsp;allied, hut not absolutely identical, type of Liassic age.

There are some very good examples of this type of Otozamites in the York Museum, one of which, labelled by Bean Otopterisnbsp;graphica, has a length of 17 cm. The pinnse have pointed apices,nbsp;and the upper edge of the base is distinctly auriculate.

This frond, of which a few pinnae arc represented in the drawing, measures 40 cm. in length, and is one of the mostnbsp;beautiful examples of a fossil Cycadean leaf in the Museumnbsp;Collection. The portion figured is a little above the middle ofnbsp;the whole frond. The pinnDB vary very slightly in size (aboutnbsp;5 cm. long and 1 cm. broad) throughout the length of the frond;nbsp;they are obliquely attached to the upper face of the rachis, andnbsp;the upper edge of the base is prominently eared. The apicesnbsp;are obtusely pointed; the upper edge of the lower pinnse isnbsp;somewhat more falcate than in those shown in Fig. 1, but thenbsp;moi'c strongly curved and sharply pointed pinnse of Otozamites

grapMcus are readily distinguislied from those of the present species. Labelled by Bean Otopteris graphica.

A younger frond than 39,201 (Fig. 1, PI. I.), showing the overlapping of the pinnae, which have the eared base and obtuselynbsp;pointed tips, as in the larger example.

7. Otozamites Feistmanteli, Zigno.

1881. Otozamites Feistmanteli, Zigno, Flor. toss, Oolit. vol. ii. p. 90, pi. xxxiv. figs. 6-8.

1890. Cf. Otozamites Mandelshhi, Feistmantel, Foss. Flor. Australia, pi. xxviii. fig. 9.

Frond narrow, linear; pinntB short and broad, attached to the upper face of the rachis by a broad base, of which the uppernbsp;corner is slightly auriculate ; the apex is bluntly rounded, thenbsp;tip being directed upwards. Venation of the Otozamites type.

In the Museums of York and Leeds there are a few fairly largo and well-preserved fronds which I regard as specificallynbsp;identical with certain Italian specimens named by Zigno Otozamitesnbsp;Feistmanteli; they are characterized by their long and narrow form,nbsp;comparable to 0. Bimhuryanus, and short and broad pinnae. Thenbsp;pinnm differ from those of the latter species in being longer andnbsp;less orbicular in shape; but some fronds referred by Zigno tonbsp;Otozamites TrevisanF furnish an example of a form more or lessnbsp;intermediate between 0, Feistmanteli and 0. Bunhuryanus, Itnbsp;is not improbable that another Italian frond named by Zigno

O. Massalongianus * is specifically identical with 0. Feistmanteli, hut the latter name has heen adopted on account of the morenbsp;striking agreement of the specimens so named by Zigno with thenbsp;English examples.

Some of the smaller fronds of Oto%amites M.olinianm'^ may he �compared also with 0. Feistmanteli, as well as with 0. parallelus.nbsp;�One or two of the specimens from Italy figured as Otozamitesnbsp;veronensis, Zigno,� are also very similar to 0. Feistmanteli.

The Indian Cycadean leaves named by Oldham amp; Morris Falmzamia hengalensis ^ are practically indistinguishable fromnbsp;0. Feistmanteli.

The frond described by Kurr from a German locality as Zamites Manamp;elslohF is closely allied to, if not identical with, Otozamitesnbsp;Feistmanteli. Another example of a similar type of leaf is affordednbsp;by 0. Reglei as figured by Saporta.� These two species are compared by Lignier with a similar type of Otozamites (0. crassifolins),nbsp;which he has described from a Lias locality in Normandy.�

The York specimen of Otozamites Feistmanteli has a length of 22 cm.; the pinnae vary in length from 8 mm. to l'4cm.,nbsp;having an average breadth of 6 mm. The example in the Leedsnbsp;Museum represents a smaller frond, bearing pinnse about 8 mm. long.

V. 3683. This is the only specimen in the British Museum which appears to be identical with Zigno�s species; it is 6 cm. longnbsp;and 1 cm. in breadth, bearing short, broad, and closely set pinnse.

Genus NILSSONIA, Brongniart.

The characteristics of this genus have already been discussed at length in the second volume of the Wealden Flora,and need notnbsp;be recapitulated.

(PI. IV. Fig. 5; Text-figs. 39 and 40.)

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Oycadites cmnptiis, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pi. vii. fig. 20.

1833. IPterophyllum comptum, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. i. pi. Ixvi. 1841. PterophyUum comptum, Morris, Annals, vol. vii. p. 118.

1863. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Of. PterophyUum princeps, Oldham amp; Morris, Pal. Ind. p. 23,

1864. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pterophylhm comptum, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx.

1878. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Of. Nilssonia polymorpha, Nathorst, Flor. BJuf, p. 72, pi. xv.

1883. Nilssonia compta, Schenk, in Richthofen�s China, p. 262, pi. liv. fig. 2.

1887. Cf. Nilssonia polymorpha, Sclienk, Foss. Pflanz. Albourskette, p. 7, pl. i. flg. 3; pl. T. fig. 22.

Frond broadly linear, varying considerably in size and in the-depth and number of the segments. The lamina is dissected up to the central midrib or rachis into truncate segments of unequalnbsp;breadth, traversed by several parallel veins both simple andnbsp;forked; the lamina is continuous over the rachis of the frond, andnbsp;the segments are not laterally attached as in Pterophyllum.

Brongniart includes in his Prodrome, under the name Pterophylhm WilUamsonis, a species from the Lower Oolite in the list of examples,nbsp;of Pterophyllum, but in the Tableau this name occurs as a synonymnbsp;of Wilssonia compta. Phillips� figure of this species in the Geologynbsp;of the Yorkshire Coast represents a portion of a frond one-halfnbsp;natural size. An earlier drawing given by Young amp; Bird ofnbsp;a specimen which is now in the Whitby Museum (No. 2381)nbsp;illustrates somewhat crudely the characteristic features of the samenbsp;type of leaf.

Nilssortia compta is one of the most abundant species in the Inferior Oolite flora, and is usually represented by severalnbsp;specimens in museum collections. Without attempting a comparative account of the various fossils of Mesozoic age which agreenbsp;more or less closely with Phillips� species, attention may be drawnnbsp;to the large leaves figured by Fontaine from the Potomac plant-beds under the name Platypterigiim densinerve} An examinationnbsp;of a few specimens of this species in the Washington Geologicalnbsp;Museum led me to regard the plant as probably a Nilssonia.

The large and broad fronds from the Rajmahal Hills of India, figured by Oldham amp; Morris� and by Feistmantel� as Pterophyllumnbsp;princeps, bear a close resemblance to the largest examples ofnbsp;Nilssonia compta ; it is not clear from the illustrations if thenbsp;segments of the lamina are laterally attached as in Pterophyllum,nbsp;or if the median portion of the frond is incomplete and presentsnbsp;a deceptive resemblance to that genus. In specimens of Nilssonianbsp;compta one occasionally sees the rachis represented by a fairly

broad shallow groove, which might suggest the lateral attachment of the lamina characteristic of Pterophyllum fronds.

The largest examples I have met with are in the Whitby Museum, some of which have a length of over 40 cm. andnbsp;a breadth of 9 cm. (vide Text-fig. 40). A large frond, withnbsp;narrow segments, 31 cm. in length, may be seen in the Scarboroughnbsp;Museum. Good specimens are represented also in the Leckenbynbsp;Collection, Cambridge, the Museum of Practical Geology, London,nbsp;and elsewhere. A Scarborough specimen in the Natural Historynbsp;Mnseum, Paris, bears the name Nilssonia Williamsonis, the originalnbsp;specific designation proposed by Brongmiart.

Nilssonia compta, characteristic of the Inferior Oolite vegetation, appears to be practically identical with some, at least, of thenbsp;fronds of Rheetic ago described by Schenk,* Nathorst,* and othersnbsp;as N. polymorpha; this close resemblance affords one of manynbsp;instances of the marked agreement between the Rhaetic and Inferiornbsp;Oolite floras.

A frond 28 cm. long and 6-2 cm. broad at the widest part; labelled by Bean Pterophyllum comptum. This unusually goodnbsp;specimen demonstrates the Nihsonia character of the species, thenbsp;typical form of the segments, and the general habit of the frond.nbsp;The parallel veins are well marked as prominent ridges on thenbsp;surface of the segments.

Good examples of fronds of medium width. In one of the specimens (Fig. a) the manner of attachment and form of the basalnbsp;segments are clearly shown ; they extend to the middle of thenbsp;upper face of the raohis, and are not attached to the edge as innbsp;Pterophyllum. In Fig. b the basal segments are much shorternbsp;and smaller than in the example illustrated in Fig. a. These twonbsp;figures afford good examples of the variation in the basal portionnbsp;of fronds of the same species. The longest frond measures 18 cm.nbsp;in length.

Another basal portion of a frond, showing the broad petiole and the form of the lowest segments. The segments of thisnbsp;frond have very prominent veins as broad ribs, with occasionallynbsp;much finer veins between. The prominence of the ribs is nonbsp;doubt due to the presence of bands of thick-walled hypoderm,nbsp;which with the vascular bundles probably constituted I-shapednbsp;strengthening girders stretching across the lamina.

Part of an unusually large frond in the quot;Whitby Museum. Owing to the imperfect state of preservation of the mediannbsp;portion, the segments do not extend so far over the upper facenbsp;of the rachis as in the more perfect specimens. The whole frondnbsp;measures more than 40 cm. in length, and has a breadth of 9 cm.nbsp;Cf. Schenk�s figures of Nilssonia polymorpJia; also the fronds fromnbsp;India described by Oldham amp; Morris as Pterophyllum princeps.

39,305. A long and narrow frond, associated with. Taniopteris vittata and other plants.

Bean Coll.

Other specimens:�2516 (short and hasal segments), V. 2517, V. 3520, 10,311 (a good example from Gristhorpc Bay), 12,398,nbsp;13,510, 13,513, 40,469�, 52,582.

A small portion of a large specimen in the Whitby Museum (drawn by M. Seward). (Nat. size.)nbsp;3. Nilssonia mediana (Lcckenhy, ex Bean MS.).

1829. Cycadites tenuicaulisj Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pi- vii. fig. 19. 1841. PteropJiyllxmi tenuicaulej Morris, Annals, vol. vii. p. 119.

Pterophylhim tenuicaule, linger, Gen. spec, plant. foss. p. �291. Fterophyllmn tenuicanU, Morris, Brit. Foss. p. 19.

Pterophyllmn medimimn, Leckenby, Quart. Joiirn. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77, pl. viii. tig. 3.

Type-specimens. The type-spccimcns of Pterophyllum mediannm,. Lcckcnhy, ex Beau MS., and of P. angustifolhm, Leek., ex Beannbsp;MS., are in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge (�los. 278, 275),

Lrond broadly linear ; the lamina is divided into numerous-linear segments of unequal breadth traversed by several parallel veins. This species agrees closely in habit with Nilssonia compta,nbsp;hut differs in the narrower leaf - segments and in their morenbsp;acuminate and less truncate apices. The veins arc somewhat lessnbsp;prominent in Nilssonia mediana, and the lamina is thinner andnbsp;not so stout as in N. compta.

The specimen figured by Phillips in 1829 as Cycadites tenuicanlis from the middle shale of Gristhorpe is defined as follows in thenbsp;third edition of the Geology of Yorkshire-. � �Frond lanceolate,nbsp;ample, with a slender raohis; leaflets perpendicular to the raohis,nbsp;unequal, ending obtusely, approximate at the base ; venationnbsp;parallel, delicate.�'

In 1864 Leckenby described two species of Yorkshire Oolite plants under thenbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pterophyllum medianum wA P. angustifoUum-,

the type-spccimons of these species are, I believe, indistinguishable specifically from the plant named by Phillips Cycadites tenuicanlis.nbsp;According to the strict rules of priority Phillips� term should be

retained, quot;but as we possess the typc-spoeiinens of Leckenhy his specific designation mediana may be used in preference to thenbsp;�older term.

Some of the best examples of N-ilssonia mediana, other than those in the British Museum, are in the Leckenby Collection,nbsp;Cambridge.

This frond measures 20 cm. in length, and illustrates the larger form of the species. The segments vary considerably in breadth;nbsp;they are distinctly broadened at the base, and longer in proportionnbsp;to their width than in Nilssonia compta. The simple parallel veinsnbsp;�are clearly preserved.

Prond 18 cm. long, with very narrow segments, about 4 cm. long :and 3-6 mm. broad; more acutely pointed than in 39,293. Thenbsp;rachis is represented by a shallow groove. This type of frond wasnbsp;named by Leckenby Pterophyllum angustifoUum, and the specimennbsp;is so labelled by Bean; a comparison of several specimens in thenbsp;Leckenby and British Museum Collections leads me to unhesitatinglynbsp;regard this form of frond as specifically indistinguishable fromnbsp;Nilssonia mediana.

.V frond 20 cm. long, illustrating the very unequal breadth of the segments. Associated with fragments of Tmniopteris viltata.

A still narrower frond, in which the apical portion has been preserved. This specimen shows the finer texture of the segmentsnbsp;as distinguished from the thicker and coarser segments of N. conipta.nbsp;Labelled by Bean Pterophyllum angustifolium.

3. Nilssonia tenuinervis, ISTatliorst. ,

Frond linear; the lamina entire, characterized by the numerous fine veins given off almost at right angl�s from the axis.

Nathorst proposed the specific name tenuinervis for a few examples of Nilssonia fronds from the Inferior Oolite of the Yorkshire

coast, which differ from the other species of the genus in the-ffreater number and fineness of the lateral veins : he notices

the resemblance which the species hears to the genus Taniopteris. Nathorst�s species may he compared with Nilssonia orientalis,, Heer.'

Nathorst�s species appears to he represented by throe specimens in the National Collection and by a few others in the Museums ofnbsp;Manchester and other places.

13,503. A specimen 13 om. long and 4-5 cm. broad. The numerous delicate veins are clearly shorrn, curving slightlynbsp;downwards towards the midrib; the texture of the leaf appearsnbsp;to be more delicate than in Taniopteris.

1. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ctenis falcata, Bindley amp; Hutton.

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ctenis, sp.

In 1829 Phillips described a plant from the Oolitic rooks of the Yorkshire coast under the name Cycadites suletcaulis,^ andnbsp;in 1834 Bindley amp; Hutton^ substituted the name Ctenis falcata,nbsp;altering the generic designation on the ground that the venationnbsp;did not agree with that of Cycadites. The authors of the Fossilnbsp;Flora compared this plant with a species of Acrostichum andnbsp;with Palms, but considered that it should be included amongnbsp;the CycadaceaB. They proposed to apply the generic name Ctenisnbsp;to � all leaves having the general character of Cyoadese, but withnbsp;the veins connected by forks or transverse bars.�

There has been considerable difference of opinion among palaeobotanical writers as to the position of Ctenis in the plantnbsp;kingdom ; some authors�Sternberg, Brongniart, Sehimper, andnbsp;others�have regarded it as a Cycad, while by many others itnbsp;has been included among the Perns. quot;Without giving the historynbsp;of the views expressed as to the botanical position of Ctenis, wenbsp;may briefly consider the evidence on which the genus has beennbsp;referred to the Perns rather than to the Cyoads.

In 1868 Schenk� discovered certain characters in a specimen of Ettingshausen�s species Yfewfopferw asplenioides, which led him tonbsp;substitute the generic designation Ctenis. The veins of the broadnbsp;linear segments of the pinnate frond were found to agree in their

232 lateral anastomoses with the genus Ctenis, and the lower surfacenbsp;of the segments was found to ho covered with small circularnbsp;projections regarded by Schenk as sporangia. The preservationnbsp;of the specimen did not permit of any microscopical examination of

[I am indebted to the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester for the use of the blocks from which Figs. 42 and 43 have been printed.]

the epidermal cells or � sporangia.� Additional evidence bearing on the systematic position of Ctenis has been furnished in recent

years by Raciborski and Staub. The former author, in his Fossil Flora of the Cracoiv Bistriet, describes several species of Ctenis^nbsp;some of which exhibit circular projections on the surface of thenbsp;segments similar to those notieed by Schenk. The epidermal cellsnbsp;of the segments boar several circular projections which Raciborskinbsp;regards as sori or sporangia, and accepts as evidence of a Rilicineannbsp;affinity; he was, however, unable to recognize any actual sporangialnbsp;structure. In a recent paper by Staub ^ on species of Ctenis, annbsp;unusually large frond of Liassio age, reaching a length of 2 metres,nbsp;is described under the name Ctenis hungarica; on the segmentsnbsp;of this fi�ond were found small depressions which the author of thenbsp;species speaks of as sori. We see, then, that the inclusion ofnbsp;Ctenis among the ferns rests on inconclusive evidence, and no proofnbsp;has been adduced that the circular elevations or depressions onnbsp;the epidermal cells are of the nature of sori or sporangia.

In his Floran rid Bjnf laathorst ^ described some long and broad leaves with reticulate venation, which ho referred to a new genus,nbsp;Anthrophyopsis, on account of their resemblance to the simplenbsp;fronds of the polypodiacoous ioTO- Anthroplwjum. In 1879 JIathorstnbsp;transferred these RhEetic specimens to the genus Ctenis, the supposednbsp;leaves being recognized as detached and fragmentary segments ofnbsp;a pinnate frond. Some of the figures of the Scanian fossils shownbsp;circular elevations on the epidermis like those already referred to.nbsp;31 j� own observations lead me to regard the evidence hitherto reliednbsp;-on in favour of placing Ctenis among the ferns as insufficient, andnbsp;I believe the general habit of the leaves is a strong argumentnbsp;for including the species of this genus among the Cycadales.nbsp;A specimen in the Manchester Museum from the Yorkshire coastnbsp;rocks was described by Nathorst^ in 1880 as probably a new speciesnbsp;�of Anthrophyopsis; a recent examination of this specimen hasnbsp;affoi�ded important information as to the nature of the supposednbsp;sori described by Raciborski, Schenk, Nathorst, and Staub. Thenbsp;specimen (Text-fig. 42) consists of a portion of a pinna 9 cm. innbsp;length and 2'6 cm. broad, traversed by short parallel veins which arcnbsp;connected here and there by oblique transverse veins; the epidermal

cells, wHch are 'well preserved, and readily examined under the-microscope after suitable treatment, are cbaracterizcd by prominent circular papillse agreeing precisely with those figured as sori bynbsp;Eaciborski and other authors. It is not uncommon among recentnbsp;plants to find the surface cells of a leaf provided with conicalnbsp;elevations or papillas; the circular elevations on the epidermal cellsnbsp;of Cteiiis (Text-fig. 43, A p and B) are identical with those metnbsp;with in recent plants. The enlarged drawing (Text-fig. 43) demonstrates the nature of these sorus-like projections as seen in thenbsp;Ctenis segments in the Manchester Museum. The three epidermal

cells shown in side-view in Text-fig. 43 B illustrates the nature of the circular dots seen in surface-view in Pig. 43, p; the shadednbsp;areas in the drawing mark the position of depressions, which nonbsp;doubt occur immediately above stomata (Pig. 43, s).

In view of these facts, I prefer to retain Ctenis as a Cycadean genus characterized bj� pinnate fronds with linear segmentsnbsp;traversed by parallel veins connected at intervals by lateralnbsp;anastomoses.

1, Ctenis falcata, Lindley amp; Hutton.

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cycadites suleicauUs, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pi. vii. fig. 21.

1856. Ctenis falcata, Zigno, Flor. foss. Oolit. vol. i. p. 190, pi. xxiv. figs. 1-3.

1875. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ctenis falcata, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 218, pi. vii. fig. 21.

1876. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cf. Ctenis orientalis, Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. iv. (2), p. 105,.

Frond pinnate ; the linear pinnas arc attached ohliipuely or almost at right angles to the sides of the rachis, and as regardsnbsp;their attachment they resemble those of the genus Pterophyllumnbsp;the long pinnae or segments, which reach a length of more thannbsp;10 cm., taper gradually towards an acuminate apex, which isnbsp;seldom preserved; they are traversed hy several parallel veins,nbsp;connected hy frequent lateral anastomoses, which diverge slightlynbsp;in the broader basal region of the pinnae (PI. VIII. Fig. 2). Atnbsp;the base of each pinna the lamina becomes broader, the uppernbsp;margin is bent slightly upwards on the rachis, and the lowernbsp;margin is strongly decurrent. The frond terminates in two pinnaenbsp;placed almost parallel to the long axis of the leaf.

The name Zamia longifolia, used hy Brongniart in his Prodrome in 1828,' has been superseded hy Ctenis falcata of Lindley amp; Hutton.nbsp;A good specimen of Ctenis from Cayton, near Scarborough, in the

Jfatural History Museum, Paris, bears Brongniart�s name Zamia longifolia, and demonstrates tbat this designation was applied '^onbsp;the pinnate frond now known as Ctenis falcata.

A good specimen, showing very clearly the manner of attachment and venation of the pinnae. The longest pinna is rather morenbsp;than 12 cm. long, without the apex, and l�2cm. wide. Eachnbsp;pinna is broadest at the base, and the lower margin is decurrentnbsp;on the rachis, being overlapped by the upper edge of the pinnanbsp;next below.

V. 3559. Similar to the specimen shown in pi. ciii. of Bindley and Hutton. Pragments of apical portions of fronds; the pinnoenbsp;are more oblique to the rachis than in 38,763, and their lowernbsp;margins strongly decurrent. The veins are clearly shown.

V. 3560. Parts of fronds with long and gradually tapering pinnse; the longest pinna is about 13 cm. long, and near the apexnbsp;only 4 mm. in breadth. This example affords an indication ofnbsp;the long and tapered pinnae which characterized the species ; innbsp;most specimens the distal part of the pinnae is not shown.

39,206. Similar to 38,763 (PI. VIII. Pig. 2), but with rather narrower pinnae. The irregularly striated surface of the rachis isnbsp;distinctly shown, with the pinnae attached to the margin.

S. Ctenis, sp.

1900. Ctenis, sp., Seward, Manchester Lit. amp; Phil. Soc. vol. xliv. p. 21, pi. ii. fig. 4.

The specimen in the Manche.ster Collection referred to as Ctenis, sp., is too small to enable one to give a diagnosis of the

characters of the frond of which it formed a part. The form, of the segment with the stout veins and lateral connections isnbsp;shown in Text-fig. 42. The epidermal papillas (Text-fig. 43) havenbsp;already been described in the remarks on the genus Ctenis. i^onbsp;far as it is possible to base any comparison on the single specimennbsp;of this type of Ctenis^ which is not represented in the Britishnbsp;Museum, the frond probably agreed fairly closely with that ofnbsp;Ctenis fallax, Nath., from the Rhffitic of Scania; it differs fromnbsp;Ctenis falcata in the greater breadth and coarser venation of the-pinna?.

The genus PtUozamites was instituted by Nathorst in 1878;. and defined as follows: � �Folia petiolata lincaria, rogulariternbsp;pinnata, pinnis tota latitudinc basis insertis, margine anterioronbsp;recta vcl paulum concava, posteriore rotundata, nervis dichotomis.nbsp;radiantibus pi-scsertim versus marginom posteriorem. Differtnbsp;a PtilophyUo margine anterioro pinnarum non subauriculata ab-Anomozamite a quo nonnullDO species vix distinguonda? nervis.nbsp;radiantibus non parallelis.�'

At a later date this author proposed the generic name Ctenozamites: for fronds of the Ptilozamites type which are bipinnate and notnbsp;simply pinnate in their habit; this genus has been employed bynbsp;Schenk in his description of a bipinnate frond�Ctenozamites cycadea-�from Persia.^

We may make use of the more recent designation as a subgenu.s of Ptilozamites, and apply it to bipinnate fronds such as Ctems.nbsp;Leclicnhji, Bean MS. The data we at present possess is insufficientnbsp;to enable us to decide with certainty the botanical affinity ofnbsp;Ptilozamites, but the probability is that the fronds, having thenbsp;characters of Nathorst�s genus, may bo best compared with thenbsp;recent Cycad, Botvenia spectalUis, Hook.

Ptilozamites (Ctenozamites) Leckenbyi (Leekenby, ex Bean MS.).

1864. Ctenis Leckenbyi, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 78, pi. X. fig. 1.

Frond bipinnate ; rachis stout, giving off pinnae at an acute angle; the pinnae have slender axes bearing falcate segmentsnbsp;attached by the whole of the broad base, the apices are obtuselynbsp;pointed and directed upwards, in the distal portion the margin maynbsp;be finely denticulate ; several x'oins enter the base of each segmentnbsp;and diverge slightly, and they branch diohotomously once or morenbsp;as they pass to the distal edge of the segment, which is formed ofnbsp;the strongly bent posterior margin.

This species does not appear to be represented by any specimens in the British Museum Collection of Yorkshire plants; the onlynbsp;examples I hax'e met with are those in the Leckenby Collection,nbsp;Cambridge, the best of which was figured in 1864 under Bean�snbsp;manuscript name, Ctenis Lechenhyi.

I am indebted to Professor Nathorst for calling my attention to a specimen in the Stockholm Museum in which the margin of thenbsp;segments is finely denticulate towards the apex.

The species which present the closest agreement with Ptilozamites {Ctenozamites') Lechenhyi are those described by Nathorst fromnbsp;Scania,^ and the still finer examples figured by Schenkfromnbsp;Persia. A specimen in the British Museum (No. 40,674) fromnbsp;the Liassic beds of the south-west of England bears a strongnbsp;resemblance to Leokenby�s Inferior Oolite species.

Fontaine has described several examples of fronds not unlike Ptilozamites Lechenhyi from the Potomac beds ; the species

' Nathorst (780, pls- vii., xi., and xii.; (78^), pi. iii. � Schenk (87), pis. iii., iv., vi.-ix.

Ctenopteris imignis, Pont.,' may be specially compared with the English type. It is worthy of note that some of the frondnbsp;fragments described by Eeistmantel from the Upper Mesozoic bedsnbsp;of Queensland as Thinnfeldia odontopteroides (Morr.) should benbsp;referred to Ctenozamites}

The solitary specimen which I have referred to this genus does not afiord entirely satisfactory evidence as to the precisenbsp;manner of attachment of the pinnte to the rachis, but it isnbsp;probably better to adopt the designation Bioonites than any othernbsp;generic name. I have elsewhere given a comprehensive diagnosisnbsp;of this genus.�

Dioonites Nathorsti, sp. nov.

Type-specimen. quot;Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge (Leckenby �Coll., hlo. 222).

Frond pinnate; the pinnae are given off from a fairly stout rachis at an acute angle. The pinnae are narrow and linear, 3-4 mm.nbsp;wide, and reaching a length of 8 cm.; they are attached by thenbsp;whole of the base, which is slightly wider than the rest of thenbsp;pinnae; the pinnse are tapered gradually to an acuminate apex,nbsp;and are traversed by about eight parallel veins.

On the back of the type-specimen Nathorst has written: � This is a new species, belonging to some genus allied to PterophijUum.quot;nbsp;In the best specimen, which is probably seen from the uppernbsp;side, the rachis has a length of 14�5 cm.; the pinnse appear to benbsp;attached laterally, but this is, I believe, due to the exposurenbsp;of the dorsal surface of the frond. The frond must have reachednbsp;a considerable length, and the breadth, which is fairly uniformnbsp;in the portion preserved, measures approximately 15-16 cm.

In all probability tbe Lookenby specimen represents a new species; I have chosen the specific name Natlmrsti after my friendnbsp;Professor Nathorst, of Stockholm, whose work has matcriallynbsp;aicled me in the identification of the Yorkshire plants.

Dr. Eichards, who printed a list of British Cycadean leaves in 1884,' refers this specimen to an Indian species, Ptorophyllumnbsp;(listans, Oldham amp; Morris, and adopts the generic name Pioom'tcs.nbsp;The frond so named by Morris from the Eajmahal Hills is represented by imperfect fragments, which bear a close resemblance tonbsp;the Yorkshire specimen, but the evidence is not, I believe, sufficientnbsp;to justify us in making use of his specific designation.

Among other Cycadean fronds from Indian localities which arc very similar to Bioonifes Natlior�i, may be mentioned Zmnitesnbsp;proximus, Peistmantel,� CycaAites Blanfordianus, Oldliam amp; Morris,^nbsp;Pterophyllum Footeanum, Peistmantcl.' Another species similarnbsp;to Pioonites Nathorsti is that described by Jaeger as Osmundites-ptectimtus ^ ( = Pterophyllum Jaegeri, Brongn.). The Ehseticnbsp;species, Pterophyllum Braunimium, Geipp.,� and P. caniallimmm,nbsp;Gopp.,� may also be compared with the Englisli type.

The frond figured by Hosius amp; Yon Marck � as Dioonites^ ahietinus, Miq., bears a resemblance to B. Fathorsti.

A Genus of Doubtful Affinity.

Braun proposed this generic name, as a substitute for Zamia of Brongniart and Zamiten of Presl, for such species as Zmnites-

- Feistmantel (77'), p. 62, pi. xli. figs. 1 and 2. ^ Oldham amp; Morris (63), pi. ix. fig. 2.

didans, Presl, and Z. lanceolatua, L. amp; H. The following is his definition of the genus :�

�Leaves pinnate; segments distant, alternate, contracted towards the hase. Veins divergent at the base of the segments, approximately parallel in the median and apical portions.�

The definition of Podozamites, -which has been somewhat modified by later writers, may be stated as follows :�

Frond (or shoot ?) pinnate, the slender axis bears segments, usually somewhat far apart and at unequal distances, which varynbsp;considerably in both size and shape, from narrow linear andnbsp;acuminate to broadly oval and obtusely pointed segments; thenbsp;segments are constricted basally, and traversed by numerous veinsnbsp;divergent at the base and approximately parallel to the edges ofnbsp;the narrower segments, but convergent in the distal portions ofnbsp;the broader segments. The base of the petiole may be enclosed bynbsp;broad acuminate imbricating scale-leaves.

It has been the custom to include this widely-spread genus in the Cj�cadaoeie, but it is worthy of note that the resemblance whichnbsp;the fronds possess to a shoot of Agathis australis, Salisb., a Newnbsp;Zealand Conifer, renders it by no means impossible that its truenbsp;position is among the Conifei�as. Such specimens as we possess donbsp;not enable us to determine the precise manner of attachment ofnbsp;the segments, but there are indications of a spiral phyllotaxisnbsp;which would afford a strong argument in favour of the relationshipnbsp;of Podozamites to the Coniferse. Among recent Cyoads, there arenbsp;species of Zamia, Ceratozamia, Macrozamia, and Encephalartos,nbsp;which closelj' resemble Podozamites lanceolatus, but in the Cycadeannbsp;fronds the segments are more regularlj' disposed than in most ofnbsp;the examples of the fossil species. Schenk prefers the genericnbsp;name Zamites to Podozamites; this author has figured a specimennbsp;which bears scale-leaves at the base of the petiole,' suggesting annbsp;origin from a lateral bud such as is occasionally produced by recentnbsp;plants of the genus Cyeas; ^ the scales, as Schenk points out, maynbsp;be compared also with the bud-scales of Agathis.

by laathorst from the Bhaetic beds of Bj'uf, in which the lower part of the petiole is clasped by a few imbricate bracts bearingnbsp;a striking resemblance to bud-scales.

The structure of the epidermis of the pinnee is described by Schenk, and regarded by him as an argument against an alliancenbsp;with the genus Agathis-, the form of the epidermal cells, however, does not, I believe, constitute an important objection to thenbsp;suggestion that Podozamites may represent the shoot of a Conifernbsp;rather than the pinnate frond of a Cycad.

In addition to the type represented by Podoamp;amites lanceolatus, there are others characterized by broadly oval segments, �nbsp;which suggest a comparison with the broad leaves of Agathisnbsp;Pammara, Eich.

It is unsatisfactory to express a definite opinion in favour of assigning Podozamites to the Coniferse rather than to the Cycadaoe�nbsp;on such evidence as is before us, but I am disposed to favour thenbsp;view that the plants, which it has been customary to refer tonbsp;Braun�s genus, may be more correctly compared with the Conifernbsp;Agathis than with any recent Cycad.

Podozamites lanceolatus (Bindley amp; Hutton).

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Zamites lanceolatus, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, foss. p. 282.

1853. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;? Zamites Staueri, Ettingsbausen, Lias Oolit. Pflanz. pi. ii. fig. 5.

1864. Zamites lanceolatus, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77. 1866. ? Podozamites lanceolaUis, Newberry, Foss. Plants China, pi. ix. fig. 7.nbsp;1868. Zamites lanceolatus, Bichwald, Leth. Boss. pi. iii. fig. 1.

1870. Podozamites lanceolatus, Scbimper, Trait, pat. veg. vol. ii. p. 160. 1875. Zamites lanceolatus, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 225, lign. 54.

? Podozamites lanceolatus, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. pi. iii. figs. 7-17; pi. iv. figs. 1-10.

' E.g. Podozamites Seinii, Geyler (77), pi. xxxiii., xxxiv. ; Yokoyama (89), pi. vi.

Podozamites lanceolatus. Heer, Flor. foss. Arct, vol. iv. (3), pl. vii. figs. 1-7.

P. lanceolatus, ibid. vol. iv. (2), pl. x.viii. fig. 4 ; pl. xxvi. figs. 2 and 3 ; pl. x,\vii. figs. 1 and 5.

? P. lanceolatus, Geyler, Palajont. vol. xxiv. pl. xxxiii. figs. 1-4; pl. xxxiv. figs. 3-5.

? Podozamites lanceolatus, Scbenk, Foss. Pflanz. Albourskette, pl. viii. fig. 42.

Podozamites lanceolatus, Yokoyama, Journ. Coll. Sci. Japan, vol. iii. pp. 45 et seq., pis. iv. etc.

? Podozamites lanceolatus, A'okoyania, loc. cit. vol. vii. p. 222, pl. xxiii. figs. 4 and 5.

Podozamites lanceolatus, Hartz, jVIed. Gr�n. vol. xix. p, 237, pl. .xiii. figs. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9; pl. xiv. figs. 1-3 and 5.

Podozamites lanceolatus, Seward, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. vol. xliv. p. 15.

Type-specimen of Lindlcy amp; Hutton in the Manchester Museum, Owens College (Ho. 321).

Proncl pinnate ; rachis slender, giving off at unequal intervals linear lanceolate segments; the segments are characterized by theirnbsp;gradually tapered acuminate apices and constricted bases; they axenbsp;traversed by several parallel veins.

The type-specimen was obtained by Williamson from Haibum Wyke, and presented with a drawing and brief description tonbsp;Lindley; it is described by the former as �no doubt produced bynbsp;some one of the Cycadeoideous stems of the Oolitic rocks.� Thenbsp;raohis is 13 cm. in length, bearing irregularly disposed linearnbsp;pinna3, about 7 mm. broad, attached by a narrow base. The longestnbsp;pinna measures 7 cm. in length, and tapers gradually to annbsp;acuminate apex, but becomes suddenly narrow towards the basalnbsp;end; a few of the pinnae appear to be laterally attached to thenbsp;rachis, with a slightly decurrent lower margin, but in one or two of

tlie pinnaj the attachment appears to bo rather on the upper face of the rachis. The reins are numerous and parallel, as in thenbsp;Cycadoan genus Zamite�. The specimen is not sufficiently Avollnbsp;preserved to enable us to determine the exact manner of attachmentnbsp;of the pinnm, and it is very doubtful if all of them are shown innbsp;their original position. It is probable that the pinnae of this speciesnbsp;were deciduous and separated from the rachis by a definitenbsp;separation-surface, and this circumstance adds to the danger of'nbsp;assuming that all the leaflets are in their original positions.^

The considerable amount of variation in the size and form of the segments has given rise to the institution, by Heer and othernbsp;authors, of several varietal terms, but it is iin]5robablo that thenbsp;numerous so-called varieties were borne by distinct plants. Itnbsp;would seem that the species is characterized by a marked tendencynbsp;to variation in the form and dimensions of the linear-lanceolatenbsp;segments. A specimen in the York Museum, which cannotnbsp;reasonably be separated specifically from the ordinary type suchnbsp;as is represented in Text-fig. 44, illustrates this variability. Thenbsp;pinna) in the York specimen are approximately 4 mm. in breadth;nbsp;they are arranged on the shale at unequal distances apart, andnbsp;attached by a narrow base to the slender rachis.

Among the numerous specimens figured by Heer from Jurassic rocks of Siberia and Spitzbergen, there are several which appearnbsp;to be identical with Podozamites lanceolatus (L. amp; H.), and othersnbsp;with broader segments (c.g. P. pulcliellm'-) which represent another�nbsp;specific t5-pe.

We find several Hhmtio examples of Podozaniites^ referred tO' such species as P. lanceolatus, P. distans, P. Pmmonsi, and others,nbsp;which appear to he almost, if not quite, identical with the type-species of Lindlcy amp; Hutton ; it is clear that this plant was onenbsp;of the most widely spread elements in both the Rhmtic and Oolitenbsp;floras.

This sjDCoimen has a length of 17'5 cm. from the base to the tip of the highest leaflet. The preservation is unfortunately not very

^ Vide Natliorst (7S) ; Scheuk (67) ; t'outaiiie (SS), pi. .xxxiii. fiquot;-. 2, etc.

good as regards the manner of attachment and venation of the leaflets. As shown in the drawing, the pinna? (or leaflets) arenbsp;not regularly disposed on the axis, but occur at irregular distances,nbsp;thus differing from the more regular arrangement of pinnae innbsp;a Cycadean frond. Each � pinna � is narrower at the base andnbsp;tapers gradually to an acuminate tip ; the veins are numerousnbsp;and approximately parallel to the edges of the leaflets. Thenbsp;figured specimen bears a close resemblance to the type-specimennbsp;of Lindley amp; Hutton (in the Manchester Museum); cf. also thenbsp;figure given by Schenk in the Flora der Gren%scMchten of Zamitesnbsp;iistans, Presl, var. longifolia} A specimen from Bayreuth (Keuper)nbsp;in the Museum Collection (Ho. 1184) also bears a close resemblancenbsp;to 39,303.

Class GIKKGOALES.

Pamily GIITKGOACE^.

The genus Ginkgo (or Salisburia), the Maidenhair-tree of China and Japan, has long been recognized as an isolated member of thenbsp;Coniferse ; but in recent years it has been shown that there arenbsp;good grounds for giving expression to its peculiarities by institutingnbsp;a special division of Gymnosperms for the inclusion of this mono-tj-pic genus.

In a recent number of Die Natiirliclien Pflamenfamilien by Engler amp; Prantl, the name Ginkoales is adopted as a class-designation, and in this subdivision of the Gymnosperms is includednbsp;the family Ginkgoacem, represented by the single living genusnbsp;Ginkgo. The following definition of the Ginkgoacese is quotednbsp;from Engler amp; Prantl:�'

�Flowers unisexual, dioecious, without perianth. Male flowers shortly stalked, long, and of loose or open structure. Stamensnbsp;with two free pollen - sacs. Pollen spherical, producing twonbsp;spermatozoids before fertilization. Female flowers supported onnbsp;a long axis bearing usually two terminal carpels, and rarely morenbsp;than two ; these are stalked spherical bodies, the seed beingnbsp;surrounded at the base by an enveloping collar-like structure.nbsp;Ovules with one integument. The ripe seeds have a fleshy outernbsp;coat and a hard, strong, inner coat. Embryo with two cotyledons.nbsp;Leaves stalked; the lamina divided into two or more lobes.�

The most important advance made in recent years as regards our knowledge of the morphology and natural position of Ginkgo is thenbsp;discovery by the Japanese botanist Hirase � of large ciliated andnbsp;spirally coiled spermatozoids, which are produced in the pollen-tubenbsp;shortly before fertilization. Among Conifers the male generative

cells, SO far as we know at present, arc always non-motilo ; but, on the other hand, spcrmatozoids similar to those of Ginlcgo havenbsp;recently been discovered in two genera of Cycads, Cycas' andnbsp;Zamia,.- The fertilization of the egg-cell bj' means of spermatozoidsnbsp;affords an important distinction between the Ginkgoales andnbsp;Conifera3, and serves as another connecting link between Ginhgonbsp;and the Cycads. There are several features, as regards bothnbsp;vegetative and reproductive characters, in which Ginkgo showsnbsp;a distinct approach to the recent Cj^cads; and the Cycadaccaj arenbsp;linked to the Ferns by several Palaiozoio genera of plants, whichnbsp;it is now customary to include in the class Cyoadofilices. Innbsp;the Ginkgoacese, then, we have a family connected by severalnbsp;characters with the Cycadacese, and, like the Cycads, exhibitingnbsp;certain points of contact with the Ferns,

Ginkgo is the sole surviving representative of the Ginkgoales, but there is good reason for including in the same class certain fossilnbsp;genera characteristic of the Mesozoic epoch. In the first placenbsp;we have several fossil species usually referred to Ginkgo itself;nbsp;the genus Baiera is another closely allied type which should bonbsp;placed in the same family, and I believe we may reasonablynbsp;include in the Ginkgoacea; the type of female flower to whichnbsp;Carruthers gave the name Beania? There are several othernbsp;genera which are often referred to the same family with Ginkgo,nbsp;both of Palfcozoic and Mesozoic age, but these need not benbsp;discussed here. The only other genus, represented in the Inferiornbsp;Oolite strata of East Yorkshire, which need be considered as anbsp;possible claimant for member.ship of the Ginkgoacese is Heer�snbsp;Camp;ekanowskia, in which is now included the plant named bynbsp;Lindley amp; Hutton Solenites Murraymia; for reasons stated elsewhere I have considered Czekamwskia as a Conifer of which thenbsp;precise position is a matter of uncertainty. The evidence on whichnbsp;a close relationship of Hoer�s genus with Ginkgo has frequentlynbsp;been assumed to exist, is not strong enough to justify anynbsp;statement which would imply more than a possibility of the twonbsp;genera belonging to the same family.

fAmceuitateni exoticarum, p. 811, 1712. Lmninjus, Jlantissa Plantariim, p. 313, 1771.]

1. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ginkgo digitata (Brongniart).

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ginkgo whitbiensis, Nathorst.

The maidenhair - tree was first described under the name Ginkgo hy Kaimpfer in 1712;' this author published a drawingnbsp;of a shoot and ovule, and spoke of the plant as Ginkgo or Ginan,nbsp;vnJgo Itsjo: �arbor nuoifera folio adiantino.� Linnisus adoptednbsp;Kaimpfer�s designation, and referred to the plant as Ginkgo hilolgt;a.nbsp;In 1797 Smith'' placed this species among the Conifers; henbsp;proposed the generic name Salisbuna and a now specific designationnbsp;adiantifoUa in place of the �uncouth name Gingko and thenbsp;incoiTect specific term hiloia.'''' Since 1797 the names Ginkgonbsp;hihba and Salishuria adiantifoUa have both remained in commonnbsp;use. Among the numerous references to Gmgko in the literaturenbsp;of the present century we find several records of the developmentnbsp;of both male and female flowers in trees grown at Montpelier,nbsp;Vienna, Kew, and elsewhere. By Hichard, Endlioher, and severalnbsp;�other authors. Ginkgo has been jjlaced in the family Taxineae ;nbsp;but Eichler, in an important contribution to Martins� Flo^-anbsp;Brasiliensis, proposed to include the genus in a separate tribe, thenbsp;Salisburyese.' In 1840 Zuccarini' called attention to the resemblance of the young leaves of Ginkgo to those of the Africannbsp;Cycad Fneephalartos Jiorridus, and instituted a comparison betweennbsp;the short shoots of the maidenhair - tree and the main stem ofnbsp;Cycads. During the past few decades new facts have graduallynbsp;heen brought to light demonstrating other and more importantnbsp;resemblances between Ginkgo and the Cycads, and finally thenbsp;discovery of motile spermatozoids in both Cycads. and Ginkgo

' Kicmpfor (1712), p. 811. A more complete historical sketch of Ghilcgo is given in a recent paper hy quot;Miss (Iowan and myself: vide Seward amp; Gowannbsp;.lt;00�-), p. 111.

250 afforded sufficient reason for the institution of a separatenbsp;subdivision of the Gymnospernis in which to include Kiempfer�amp;nbsp;genus.

Ginligo is sometimes spoken of as unknown in a wild condition, but this statement has recently been challenged by Mrs. Bishop'nbsp;(Miss Bird), who speaks of having �met with several finenbsp;specimens in the magnificent forests which surround the sources ofnbsp;the Gold Eiver and the smaller Min in quot;Western China.� '

The genus Ginlcgo, as represented by the single living species Ginkgo lihla, may be diagnosed as follows :�

A tree of pyramidal form reaching a height of over 30 metres,, with smooth grey bark, characterized among existing Gymnospermsnbsp;by its flat, broad leaves, with the Gyclopteris typo of venation,nbsp;deciduous in the autumn, possessing a long and slender petiole'nbsp;slightly grooved on its upper surface and a lamina varying considerably in size and shape, occasionally fan-shaped and entire, butnbsp;more frequently divided into two halves by a more or less deepnbsp;median division, or subdmded into several wedge-shaped lobes.nbsp;The foliage-leaves occur either scattered on long shoots or crowdednbsp;at the apex of short shoots; the latter form of leaf-bearing axisnbsp;often passes by apical growth into the long shoots bearing scatterednbsp;leaves separated by long internodes.

Flowers dioecious. The male flo'wors, which occur in the axils of scale-leaves, have the form of a stalked central axis bearingnbsp;scattered, loosely disposed stamens; each stamen consists of anbsp;slender filament terminating in a very small ajjical scale, bearingnbsp;usually two, sometimes three or four, elliptical pollen-sacs whichnbsp;open by longitudinal dehiscence. The pollen - grains develop anbsp;rudimentary prothallus consisting of a few cells, and beforenbsp;fertilization two large spirally coiled multiciliate spermatozoids arenbsp;produced from the generative nuclei in the pollen-tube. Thenbsp;female flowers usually have the form of a long peduncle bearing,nbsp;two terminal elliptical ovules enclosed at the base by a collar-likenbsp;envelope representing a reduced carpellary leaf. Abnormal femalenbsp;flowers, possessing more than two ovules, are not infrequently metnbsp;with. Each ovule consists of a nucellus enclosed by a single

^ Letter to the liOiulon Standard, Aug. 17, 1899. Vide also Bird (80), vol. ii. p. 144.

integument, which in the ripe seed forms a thick fleshy covering surrounding a hard woody shell; the nucellus possesses a well-marked pollen-chamber, and in the mature ovule the greater partnbsp;of the nucellar tissue is reduced to a thin papery layer enclosingnbsp;a largo embryo-sac which usually contains two archegonia. Afternbsp;fertilization, which may occur either before or after the ovule hasnbsp;fallen from the tree, the egg-cell develops directly into an embryonbsp;with two cotyledons.

The secondaiy wood of Ginhgo is composed of tracheids with numerous bordered pits on the radial and not uncommonly on thenbsp;tangential walls. Eesin ducts occur in abundance, both in the pithnbsp;and in the cortical tissues.

It is unnecessary to enter here into a detailed examination of the histological characteristics of Oinlcgo ; but we may brieflynbsp;summarize some of the features in which the genus agrees withnbsp;the Cycadacese.

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;The seeds are situated at the margin of the carpellary leaves,.

IVe need not concern ourselves for the present with the various views that have been held as to the morphology of the femalenbsp;flowers, a subject which has given rise to no little controversy, nornbsp;need we attempt an exhaustive description of the various featuresnbsp;of morphological and phylogenetic importance exhibited by bothnbsp;vegetative and reproductive organs.^

The leaves of Ginkgo biloha, which Krempfer and others have compared with those of the maidenhair fern, are of special

importance from the point of yiew of the geological history of the genus. The broad, -wedge-shaped or fan-shaped lamina, -withnbsp;its numerous spreading and dichotomously branched veins, atnbsp;once suggests a comparison -with such recent ferns as Adiantumnbsp;reniforme, L., Triclioymnes reniforme, Forst., Scolopendrium nigripes,nbsp;Hook., Lindsaya reniformis, Diy., and others. For many years thenbsp;fossil leaves of Ginlcgo -were regarded by Brongniart and othernbsp;siuthors as species of ferns, and usually included in the genusnbsp;Cydopteris.

It -was Heer who first dre-w attention to the probable generic identity of certain Mesozoic leaves from the Arctic regions andnbsp;Northern European localities -with the fern - like leaves of thenbsp;maidenhair-tree. ^ The recognition of these fossil leaves as speciesnbsp;of Ginkgo rather than as ferns was based on the form of the petiole,nbsp;which, Heer pointed out, agrees exactly with that of Ginkgo Mloba,nbsp;but more especially on the discovery of male flowers practicallynbsp;identical with those of the recent species, and of seeds and shortnbsp;foliage shoots very similar to those of the maidenhair - tree.nbsp;Tliore ai�o but few recent plants possessing leaves -which mightnbsp;bo mistaken for those of Ginkgo ; a few ferns, such as thosenbsp;already mentioned, have leaves in form and venation very similarnbsp;to the maidenhair-tree ; but the form of the petiole and thenbsp;frecjuent association of the reproductive structures with fossilnbsp;leaves, afford confirmatory evidence which enables us to speak withnbsp;�certainty as to many of the fossil forms. Among the Angiospermsnbsp;Gink(jo-Yds.(i loaves are very rare, and in such a plant as Hakeanbsp;liaxteri, E. Br., the reticulate venation prcclndcs confusion withnbsp;the fern-like leaf of Ginkgo.

From evidence afforded by fossil leaves and flowers it has been possible to draw up a history of the Ginkgoaccas, which demonstrates the extreme antiquity and wide geographical distribution ofnbsp;Ginkgo and other genera. It is true that some of the leavesnbsp;referred to Ginkgo may he ferns, and on the other hand certainnbsp;so-called fern species might equally well be referred to thenbsp;Ginkgoaccse.

In 1881 Heer� published an interesting paper on the history of GinkgoA�ka trees, in which he summarized the available data.

concluding that ancestral forms of the recent plant existed as far hack as the Upper Carboniferous period. Since this paper wasnbsp;written manj- new facts have come to light, which enable us tonbsp;extend the geographical distribution of the family and strengthennbsp;Heer�s conclusion as to the importance of these Gymnospermous.nbsp;plants in the Mesozoic or even in the Paleeozoic epoch.

Such genera as Ginkgophyllum, Saportma, Trichopitys, Dicrano-phyllum, Hhipidopsis, Whittleseya, and even Ginkgo itself, have been described from Carboniferous and Permian rocks as probablenbsp;members of the family to which Ginkgo hiloha belongs. Asnbsp;regards some of these genera, there is hardly sufficient evidencenbsp;in favour of their inclusion in the Ginkgoales ; on the othernbsp;hand, the close resemblance of the Permian leaves referred tonbsp;Ginkgophyllum, Ginkgo, Saportcea, and Baiem, to the recent plant,nbsp;render it probable that closely allied species existed in thenbsp;Palaeozoic era. Certain fossil seeds from St. Etiennes, of Permiannbsp;age, described by Brongniart * as species of Cardiocarpus, arenbsp;almost identical in structure with Ginkgo seeds. It is, however,nbsp;from Mesozoic strata that we obtain the most striking proof ofnbsp;the abundance ai Ginkgo-Yiko trees in the vegetation of the past.

Although as a rule it is, for various reasons, preferable to avoid the application of the name of a recent genus to fossilnbsp;species, yet the generic names Ginkgo and Salisburia have beennbsp;so generally used for fossil leaves, and on evidence of a trustworth}-nature, that it would be inadvisable to suggest a departure fromnbsp;so well established a custom. The leaves described by Gardnernbsp;from the Tertiary beds between the basaltic lava-flows of Mull,nbsp;and referred to Unger�s spiocics Ginkgo adiantoides,'^ agree sonbsp;closely with those of the recent species that we may well hesitatenbsp;to admit even a specific difference. When we come to examinenbsp;the Jurassic and Cretaceous species, examples are not lackingnbsp;which also exhibit the closest agreement with the surviving type.nbsp;It has been pointed out by more than one author that the numbernbsp;of specific names applied to Jurassic Ginkgo leaves is excessive ;nbsp;palseobotanical writers have frequently overlooked the wide rangenbsp;of variation exhibited by loaves on the same tree of a living

Gingico. There is a -wide difference between the small entire leaves home on fertile shoots and the larger ones with a shallownbsp;central incision, and between these and the leaves of whichnbsp;the lamina is divided into several comparatively narrow lobesnbsp;by divisions extending almost to the petiole. The leaves withnbsp;a large spreading and much dissected lamina are often foundnbsp;on young and vigorous shoots or on seedlings; these might wellnbsp;be included in a distinct species if found as isolated fossils.¹

It has been customary to make use of Braun�s generic name Baiera'^ or Unger�s term Jeanpaulia for loaves of a Ginkgo-\\ke habit,nbsp;but having narrower or linear segments of the type representednbsp;in PI. IX. Pigs. 3-7. Such a generic distinction is no doubt,nbsp;in some cases at least, purely artificial, but as it serves a usefulnbsp;purpose we may continue the custom, admitting that a distinctivenbsp;generic name does not necessarily imply a distinction of greatnbsp;taxonomic importance. It is easy to obtain a series of fossilnbsp;leaves exhibiting various transitional stages between the type,nbsp;in which the lamina is entire, and such a form as that shownnbsp;in Pig. 6, PL IX., where the lamina is reduced to forked acicularnbsp;segments. The limits of the two genera. Ginkgo and Baiera,nbsp;cannot therefore be accurately defined, but, speaking generally,nbsp;the former name is applied to leaves with an entire lamina, ornbsp;with a lamina divided into two or more comparatively broadnbsp;segments, while the latter name implies leaves in which thenbsp;segments vary in breadth from less than 1 mm. to 2 or 3 mm.nbsp;in breadth, and may be usually described as linear.

1. Ginkgo digitata (Brongniart).

1828. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cyclopteris digitata, Brongniart, Hist. v�g. foss. p. 219, pi. Ixi. bis,

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sphenopteris latifolia, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 148, pi. vii. fig. 18.

For figures of several forms of leaves of the recent species, vide Seward amp; 'Gowan (00), pi. x. figs. 62-66, 70.

1836.

1838.

1841.

1843.

,1846.

1848.

1849.

1850.

1852.

1853.

1854. 1856.

1864.

1868.

1869.

1871.

1875.

1877.

Cyclopteris Huttoni, Goppert, Gatt. foss. Pflan. (v. and vi.), pis. iv., v. figs. 17-19.

Cyclopteris digitata. Bunker, Wealdenbildung, p. 9, pi. i. fig. 8; pi. V. figs. 5 and 6 ; pi. si. fig. 11.

Cyclopteris digitata, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 76, pi. iv. fig. 6.

fig. 1.

Cyclopteris digitata, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 200, pi. vii. fig. 18. Oinkgo digitata. Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. iv. (1), p. 40, pi. viii.nbsp;fig. Iffl ; pi. X. figs. 1-6 (including the following varieties : biloba,nbsp;quadriloba, multiloba, and angustiloba),

? Ginkgo multinervis. Heer, Flor. foss. Arct. vol. vi (1), pis. vi., viii., and ix.

Ginkgo digitata, Yokoyania, Journ. Coll. Sci. Japan, vol. iii. p. 59, pi. xiii. fig. 2.

1894. Ginhgo digitnta, var, integrUiscula, Bartholin, Bot. Tidss. vol. xiv_ p. 96, pl. iv. fig. 1.

1900. Ginhgo digitata, Servard amp; Gowan, Annals Bot. vol. xiv. pis. ix. and x..

Cr. digitata, Seward, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. vol. xliv. p. 23,. pl. ii. fig. 5.

Cf. Cr. polaris, Nathorst, Norwegian Polar Expedition, pt. iii. pl. i, fig. 8, etc.

Ti/pe-spemnem. �lie type ol Brongniart�s figures is probably in the Paris Museum. The type-specimen named by Phillips-Sphenopter� latifolia is in the York Museum.

Leaves with a long slender petiole, slightly expanded at the base and grooved on the upper surface, attached to either long or shortnbsp;shoots. The lamina may be either entire or repeatedly lobed,nbsp;varying in shape from a broad fan-shaped form, with a straightnbsp;base, or with the lower margin of the lamina making an acute anglenbsp;with the petiole (e.g. Pig. 1, Pl. IX.), to a narrower wedge-shapednbsp;form, in which the lower edges of the lamina make an obtuse anglenbsp;with the petiole (Pig. 10, Pl. IX.). Veins numerous, .spreading,,nbsp;and branched dichotomously. The male flowers arc similar in formnbsp;to those of the recent species, the filaments of the anthers bearing,nbsp;two or more terminal elliptical or oval pollen-sacs. The femalenbsp;flowers arc imperfectly known, but probably similar in typo to thosenbsp;of Ginkgo hiloha.

In the above diagnosis, which is necessarily incomplete, the flowers are not fulh^ described, because we have no absolute proofnbsp;of the actual connection of certain species of Ginkgo leaves withnbsp;associated male flowers and seeds or fragments of female flowers.nbsp;There is, however, every reason to believe that the flowers of somenbsp;at least of the Mesozoic species of Ginkgo agreed in essentials withnbsp;those of the recent species.

It will be seen from the above synonymy that I have included under Ginkgo digitata certain species which have usually beennbsp;regarded as distinct. The chief reason for this diminution in thenbsp;number of the specific names is to be found in the markednbsp;tendency to variation in leaf-form of the recent species. Thenbsp;deeply lobed lamina, such as that illustrated in Pigs. 2 and 1�,nbsp;Pl. IX., has generally been regarded as characterizing a separatenbsp;species, named by Sternberg Cyclopteris Uidtoni, and referred to by

later authors as Ginkgo Suttoni; this fossil form may, however, ho closely matched with the more deeply lohed loaves freq^ucntly metnbsp;with on the recent species. While including both forms of leafnbsp;under one specific name, it may be convenient to distinguish thenbsp;more deeply lohed type by adding the term Suttoni as markingnbsp;a � form � or variety of the species G. digitata.

Brongniart' defined the species Cyclopteris digitata as follows :� � Cgelopteris foliis petiolatis, semiorbiculatis, flahclliformihus, adnbsp;marginem lobatis, lobis contiguis cuneiformibus truncatis velnbsp;ad apicem sinuosis, nervis tenuissimis striseformihus sequalibus.�nbsp;Brongniart compares the leaves with those of Trichomanes reniforme.

The drawing given in Phillips� work (pi. vii. fig. 18) is far from accurate ; it is impossible to detect in the specimen anythingnbsp;corresponding to the three small lobes shown at the base of thenbsp;leaf. The type-specimen represents a typical example of a Ginkgonbsp;leaf with a divided lamina; it is twice the size of the drawing,nbsp;as indicated in Phillips� figure. G�pport, like Brongniart andnbsp;other authors, placed the Ginkgo loaves in a genus denotingnbsp;a fern affinity. Braun included Cyclopteris digitata, Brongn., innbsp;his new genus Baiera, which he compared with Marsilia, on thenbsp;strength of a supposed resemblance of what he took for reproductivenbsp;structures to the sporocarps of that genus.

In the fourth volume of his Flora fossilis Arctica, Heer discussed the affinity of Cyclopteris digitata, Brongn., and alliednbsp;Jurassic species, which he described from Spitzbergen; he pointednbsp;to certain characteristics in the venation of the lamina and to thenbsp;grooved surface of the petiole of the fossil leaves as reasons fornbsp;regarding the leaves as generically identical with those of Ginkgonbsp;hiloia? Heer also described specimens of male flowers and seedsnbsp;associated with several of the fossil leaves, and these he naturallynbsp;regarded, from their very close resemblance to the flowers of thenbsp;recent species, as belonging to the plant which bore the leaves withnbsp;which they Averc found in close association.

The species Cyclopteris incisa, described by Eichwald from Bussia, is of the same form as some of the English Ginkgo leavesnbsp;from the Yorkshire coast; it agrees closely with the example

shown in Fig. 1, PI. IX,, and still more closely with an unusually largo leaf of O. digitata in the Manchester Museum.' Heer�snbsp;species G. integriuscula, from Spitzbergen, is characterized by annbsp;entire lamina, hut, as Xathorst points out and Heer has himselfnbsp;admitted, there arc no good grounds for regarding this form asnbsp;specifically distinct from G. digitata. In the York Museum therenbsp;is a very good specimen of a Ginhgo leaf from East Yorkshire,nbsp;agreeing in general shape with Fig. 1, PI. IX., hut differing innbsp;having a lamina which is practically entire.^

The Wealden leaves described by Dunker as Cgclopteris digitata, and afterwards by Schenk as Baiera muUipartita, may possiblynbsp;bo specifically identical with the Lower Oolite G. digitata, butnbsp;it is safer to suggest their identity rather than to regard it asnbsp;well established. The wide range of Ginkgo digitata is shownnbsp;by the references in the above list of synonyms; examples ofnbsp;this species have been recorded from Siberia, Spitzbergen, Franznbsp;�Tosef Land, Bornholm, England, Persia, Japan, and elsewhere.nbsp;The Arctic distribution of Ginkgo in Upper Jurassic times hasnbsp;recently been extended by the discovery of several leaves namednbsp;by Xathorst Ginkgo polaria ^; some of them are very similar tonbsp;G. digitata, and differ only in their smaller dimensions, whichnbsp;suggest an Arctic form of the English species.

Before dealing with the flowci�s which may possibly belong to Ginkgo digitata, wo may briefly describe the fossil leavesnbsp;represented in the Museum Collection.

This unusually perfect specimen has a lamina 3'8 cm. deep and 6 cm. broad, with numerous and well-preserved forked veins. Thenbsp;upper part only of the petiole has been preserved. Cf. Brongniart�snbsp;pi, vi. his, fig. 2; also Eiohwald, pi. iv. fig. 6. The veins are verynbsp;clearly shown, and follow a course similar to that in the leaves ofnbsp;the recent species.

For a figure of the Manchester specimen, vide Seward (00), pi. ii. fig. 5. For a figure of this species, vide Seward amp; Gowan (00), pi. x. fig. 64.nbsp;lyewton amp; Tcall (97), pi. x.xxviii.; Kathorst (00).

A smaller example, similar to that of Fig. 1 ; 3�7 cm. in breadth �and 2�8 cm. deep. Venation clearly shown.

This represents a more deeply lobed type, similar to the loaf �figured by Lindley amp; Hutton as Cyclopteris digitata, but afterwardsnbsp;placed by Sternberg and others in a distinct species�C. Huttoni.nbsp;If this form of leaf be compared with the more deeply dissectednbsp;leaves of G. hiloha, as for example the recent leaf figured bynbsp;Lindley amp; Hutton in their plate xxvii. and those figured bynbsp;Saporta and Gardner in their respective works, it will be seennbsp;that the more deeply divided lamina is in itself no sufficientnbsp;reason for a separate specific designation. This type of loaf isnbsp;represented by some examples approaching closely the form shownnbsp;in Fig. 4, PI. IX., which is referred to Baiera Phillipsi, Xathorst.nbsp;Labelled by Bean Cyelopteris digitata.

Another deeply lobed form, which can be matched exactly with some of the smaller leaves of the recent species. The lamina isnbsp;3 cm. broad and 2'7 cm. deep. This leaf occurs with several othersnbsp;on a large piece of rook; most of them exhibit a similarly lobednbsp;lamina, but others approach closely Baiera Phillipsi (PI. IX. Fig. 4).

Other specimens:�13,503 (broad segments), 24,755, 39,215, 40,468, G. digitata (forma Huttoni), V. 3300 (similar to V. 3580,nbsp;Fig. 10, PL IX.), V. 3579 (portions of several leaves), 11,019,nbsp;39,212, 40,546.

Ginkgo digitata (flowers).

Although we cannot speak with certainty as to the connection of any fossil flowers with this species, it is very probable that somenbsp;imperfect examples of male flowers and isolated pollen-sacs metnbsp;with in the English rocks may, as Xathorst first suggested, benbsp;presumably regarded as the flowers of this species.

In 1829 Phillips figured some small leaf-liko bodies as �unknown leaves � ; the original specimen, which is in the Cambridge Museum,nbsp;reveals the identity of these bodies with some more perfectly preserved fossils in the Leckenby Collection, British Museum, andnbsp;elsewhere, which Nathorst regarded as pollen - sacs probablynbsp;belonging to Ginhgo digitata. On the label attached to Philliios��nbsp;figured specimen Bean has written the following note fromnbsp;Brongniart: � � Appears to be a very curious plant, but thenbsp;specimen is incomplete, so that I cannot form any opinion aboutnbsp;it. 1838.� On another specimen Hathorst wrote : � Male flowers,nbsp;of Ginkgo digitata.quot; A more perfect specimen in the Leckenbynbsp;Collection,^ to which hlathorst has referred in his notes on Jurassicnbsp;plants in English Museums, shows a portion of a central axis from

which arc given off at right angles a few short and slender filaments, bearing elliptical bodies (pollen-sacs), either two or three togethernbsp;at their tips; some of them appear to be still in their originalnbsp;position, while others have fallen off the filaments. This fragmentnbsp;agrees with the male flowers of G. hiloha, as also with the numerousnbsp;and better preserved male flowers figured by Heer from Siberia andnbsp;elsewhere, and leaves no doubt that Phillips� �unknown leaves�nbsp;are pollen-sacs of Ginhgo. In most cases Heer simply refers to hisnbsp;specimens as male flowers of Ginhgo, and connects them withnbsp;G. SHirioa, Heer, and other species; but some of the later examplesnbsp;which he describes are spoken of as species of Antholitlms. Wenbsp;might refer the specimens of male flowers to such a genus as-

Androstrohus, but �whore there is so good a reason, as in this instance, for believing the flo-wers to belong to a definite plant, itnbsp;is hardly necessary or advisable to introduce a separate designation.

The imperfect specimen from Pranz Josef Land figured by Xathorst' as a male flower of Ginhgo, is hardly distinct enoughnbsp;for determination.

i!^umerous isolated pollen - sacs, about 5 mm. a median line indicating the longitudinal dehiscence. Fragmentsnbsp;of the slender axis of the male flower are associated with the loosenbsp;pollen-sacs.

This specimen is labelled by Bean � unknown leaves � (so called by Phillips in the description of his fig. 23, pi. vii.-); andnbsp;by Nathorst, � male flowers of Ginhgo digitata.quot;

2. Ginkgo whitbiensis, laathorst.

Leaves smaller than in Ginhgo digitata; lamina deltoid in shape, 'deeply dissected into linear segments with acuminate or somewhatnbsp;truncated tips.

The small form of leaf for which Xathorst suggested the name Ginhgo whitbiensis may be conveniently regarded as distinct fromnbsp;G. digitata, from which it differs in the smaller size of -the laminanbsp;and in the somewhat more pointed segments. Some of the smallnbsp;Ginkgo leaves, recently described by Xathorst and by Xewton amp;nbsp;Teall, from Franz Josef Land,^ may be compared with this type.

A leaf considerably smaller than the typical G. digitata, with tapered segments traversed by prominent forked veins. A second

leaf of this type occurs in close proximity to the example figured, associated with CzeTtanowsMa Murrayam, etc.

Genus BAIERA.

2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Baiera Lindleyana (Schimper).

3. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Baiera Pliillipsi, hiathorst.

�Venm primarise frondis pluries dichotomae; venae secundaria) ac vcnulte in areas hcxagonalcs clongatis irrcgulariter cau-fluentos; sporocarpia capsuloeformia, ovalia pedunculata, ternatanbsp;vel biternata.�

This diagnosis does not apply in all respects�c.g. as regards venation characters � to species of Baiera, but subsequent worknbsp;has demonstrated more satisfactorih- the true character of Braun�snbsp;genus.

The genus Baiera includes several species of Palmozoic and Mesozoic ago, some of which are almost certainly near relatives ofnbsp;the maidenhair - tree. Braun,' the author of the genus, appliednbsp;the name to some Triassic loaves which agree with Ginkgo innbsp;shape, but differ in possessing a lamina with more numerous andnbsp;narrower segments. Braun and Schenk�' included Baiera amongnbsp;the ferns, and it is not improbable that some of the species may benbsp;best compared with such recent ferns as Aotinopteris radiata, Link,nbsp;or with species of ScMzma, c.g. S. dichotoma, Sw., S. elegans, Sw.,,nbsp;and others.

Valuable evidence as to the Gymnospermous nature of some typos of the genus is afforded by examples of flowers and seeds describednbsp;by Schenk,� Heer/ and other authors. Among Palmozoio leavesnbsp;referred to Baiera, we have Baiera rirginiana, Pont. amp; Wh.,�^

from the Permian of Virginia, B. Raymondi, Eon.,' from Charmoy, and some other species. The genus was probably most widelynbsp;spread during the Jurassic period, but there is fairly strong evidencenbsp;in favour of extending its range to the Paleeozoic epoch. Innbsp;considering the range of Baiera it is important to bear in mind thenbsp;absence of any well-marked distinguishing features between somenbsp;species of this genus and some of the more dissected forms ofnbsp;Ginkgo leaves. Among Jurassic leaves of the Ginkgo type�e.g.nbsp;G. digitata (Brongn.) and Baiera Phillipsi, Nath.�it is easy tonbsp;select a series illustrating a gradual transition from leaves withnbsp;an entire lamina to those with a dissected lamina and linearnbsp;segments, conforming in all respects to Braun�s genus Baiera, andnbsp;to leaves which some authors include in the genus Jeanpaulia?

1851. Baiera'? gracilis, Bunbury, Quart. Jouru. Geol. Soc. vol. vii. p. 182, pi. X�. fig. 3.

1873. Cf. Jeanpaulia longifoUa, Saporta, Pal. Fraui;. p. 464, pi. Ixvii. fig. 1.

1900. Baiera gracilis, Seward amp; Gowan, Annals Bot. vol. xiv. pi. x. figs. 6-8.

Leaf stalked, the lamina fan-shaped, divided into several forked linear segments, each traversed by a few veins. The petiole isnbsp;long and narrow, branching at the summit into equal branches,nbsp;which bifurcate repeatedly and spread out in a fan-shaped form;nbsp;the ultimate segments arc linear, and terminate in a more or

less bluiit point. The breadth and number of the segments vary considerably in different leaves.

The plant to which Bunbury gave the name Baiera gracilis had previously been named by Bean Schizopteris gracilis, but thenbsp;latter term was never published, and is quoted, therefore, asnbsp;a manuscript name. Bunbury compares his species with Gyclopterisnbsp;Muttoni, Sternb. (= Ginhgo), and sees no reason for removing thesenbsp;two species from the ferns; he quotes Acrostiehum peltatmn asnbsp;a recent fern of similar habit. The leaves of Baiera gracilis differnbsp;but little from some of those usually referred to Ginhgo Huttoni,nbsp;Baiera longifolia or B. Phillipsi, and Solenites furcatus; all exhibitnbsp;the same general form, and are characterized by forked segments;nbsp;in B. gracilis the segments arc linear and narrower than innbsp;G. Ihdtoni, but broader than in the plant we have namednbsp;B. Linileyana.

Some of the Siberian leaves figured by Heer as Ginhgo lepidaquot;^ are indistinguishable from Baiera gracilis ; Heer�s Greenlandnbsp;species, Baiera incurmta'^ and B. Czehanowshiana,'^ may also benbsp;compared with B. gracilis. A fragment described by Bontainenbsp;from the Potomac beds as Baiera foliosa ^ bears a resemblance tonbsp;Bunbury�s species, and a specimen figured by Schenk from Chinanbsp;as B. angustiloha � is also not unlike the English type.

Some specimens of Bunbury�s species appear to be identical with the Bhastic species Baiera (or Jeanpaulia) Muensteriana (Presl).�nbsp;This probable identity, or at least striking resemblance, isnbsp;illustrated by specimen 39,209 (PI. IX. Eig. 3), which may benbsp;referred to as B. gracilis, forma Muensteriana.

The form of leaf represented by Baiera gracilis, Bunb., is one which was very widely distributed in Mesozoic times; in additionnbsp;to the species already mentioned as possibly identical with thisnbsp;type, several others might be quoted, but in most cases the datanbsp;are insufficient to enable us to do more than call attention tonbsp;resemblances without necessarily implying specific identity. It is

3 Heer (80), vol. vi. (2), pi. ii. figs. 1-3. * Fontaine (89), pi. xciv. fig. 13.

'probable that the short synonymy given for Baiera gracilis might be considerably extended without great idsk of error. The numbernbsp;of fossil leaves described by Heer and other authors, which exhibitnbsp;-every stage in the transition from the obvious Ginlcgo type tonbsp;the narrow lobed Baiera forms, demonstrate the futility ofnbsp;attempting to draw definite lines between one species and anothernbsp;when we have only' mere fragments to gaiide us.

A largo piece of rock with impressions of several leaves, which vary considerably as regards the number of linear segments.nbsp;The example figured agrees with Bunbury�s type-specimen, andnbsp;represents a fairly common form of the species. The tips ofnbsp;the segments are obtusely pointed; in some of the leaves thenbsp;segments are longer than as shown in Fig. 5 and less spreading,nbsp;as in some of the examples of Jeanpaulia Muensteriana figurednbsp;by Schenk. The longest leaf-stalk measures 7 cm. -Specimensnbsp;of Baiera Bindley ana occur in association wdth the leaves ofnbsp;B. gracilis. Labelled by Bean Sehizopteris gracilis.

In this example the segments are more numerous than in the typo-specimen or in 39,208 (PI. IX. Fig. 5), but the generalnbsp;habit of the leaf is similar to that of the specimens with fewnbsp;segments. The leaf is about 10 cm. broad, 4-5 cm. high.nbsp;�f. Saporta�s figures of Baiera Muensteriana' and B. gracilis �;nbsp;also Schenk�s figures of Jeanpaulia Muensteriana.^

In each segment there are a few parallel veins, but these are not clearly shown. The practical identity of this form of leafnbsp;with that of Jeanpaulia Muensteriana, as figured by Schenk, maynbsp;be expressed by speaking of such examples as that shown innbsp;Fig. 3 as Baiera gracilis, forma Muensteriana.

V. 2524. Labelled by Bean Schizopteris gracilis. One of the leaves of Baiera gracilis shown on this slab of rock has narrower

1 Saporta (84), pi. clvi. fig. 1 ; pi. clvii. figs. 1 and 2. - Ibid. pi. cb-ii. fig. 4; pi. clviii.

segments � rather less than 2 mm. in width � which'serve to practically connect this species with B. Lindleyana.

10,376. A leaf with few and narrow segments, approaching Baiera Lindleyana, specimens of which occur on the same piece ofnbsp;rock with the larger leaves.

Other specimens:�V. 3302, 10,318, 39,279, 39,280 (labelled by Bean Sphenopteris longifolia-, associated with a male flower ofnbsp;Pagiophyllum Williamsoni).

2. Baiera Lindleyana (Schimper).

1837. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Solemtos'i furcata, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. iii. pi. ceix.

1838. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Chondrites furcatits, Sternberg, Flor. Vorwelt, vii. p. 103.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Chondrites solenites, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, loss. p. 19.

1856. Cf. Tremsania furcellata, Zigno, Flor. loss. Oolit. vol. i. p. 23, pi. i.. 6g. ia.

1884. Triehopitys Lindleyana, Saporta, Pal. Frani;. vol. iii. p. 266, pi. civ. figs. 1 and 2.

1899. P Czekanouisicia nen-osa, Fontaine, �.S. Geol. Survey, p. 685, pi. clxix. figs. 1 and 2.

Type-specimen. The type-specimen of Baiera microphylla, Phill.,. is in the Lockenby Collection, Cambridge (IVo. 389).

The specimens on which Lindley amp; Hutton founded this species,, were obtained by �Mr. Williamson, junr.,� from Haiburn Wyko,.nbsp;near Scarborough. They made use of the generic name Solenites-

�rather for the sake of giving the plant a station and a name,�' than because they �had any reason for considering it of the samenbsp;nature as 8. Murrayana, further than its similarity of appearance.�nbsp;The Solenites furcata of Lindley amp; Hutton differs from 8. Murrayananbsp;of these authors in consisting of a definite petiole, which dividesnbsp;into several regularly forked and narrow branches, disposed innbsp;such a way as to form a broadly triangular stalked leaf, havingnbsp;very slender acicular segments. Braun referred 8olenites furcata,nbsp;L. amp; H., to his new genus Baiera, and Brongniart, in hisnbsp;Tableau, mentions this species under Braun�s name as Baieranbsp;furcata, but, in view of the distinct form of the English plant, honbsp;considers Psilotites a more suitable generic designation. Saportanbsp;at first included 8olenites furcata in the genus Jeanpauha, andnbsp;regarded it as a fern. Schimper ^ had previously altered the namenbsp;given by Lindley amp; Hutton to Jeanpaulia Lindleyana, erroneouslynbsp;including 8phenopte'ris longifoUa, Phillips, as a synonym. Atnbsp;a later date Saporta substituted his genus Trichopitys, foundednbsp;in 1875, and classed the plant among the Conifers in the tribenbsp;8alishurim, reproducing the figures of Lindley amp; Hutton to illustratenbsp;the similarity between the Oolitic species and the Permian speciesnbsp;Trichopitys heteromorpha. The resemblance between th� two plantsnbsp;is not, however, very close, and it is doubtful whether they shouldnbsp;be referred to the same genus. Hathorst expresses doubt as to thenbsp;advisability of separating 8olemtes furcata from the genus Baiera.nbsp;Solms-Laubach,^ on the other hand, favours the generic identity ofnbsp;the two plants included by Lindley amp; Hutton in their genusnbsp;Solenites. Solms speaks of Solenites furcatus as �known onlynbsp;from some scanty remains in not too good a state of preservation.�nbsp;The examples in the Leckenby Collection, including both youngnbsp;and fully expanded leaves, are well-preserved impressions, and lendnbsp;support to Braun�s view that Baiera is the most appropriate genus.nbsp;Solenites furcata differs from such plants as Bunbury named Baieranbsp;gracilis, and Schenk and Heer referred to Baiera Muenstenananbsp;(Presl), only in the narrower form of the segments, and shows nonbsp;differences sufficient to justify the adoption of another generic term.nbsp;The specific name Lindleyana has been retained, as the most

convenient designation; the original name furcala of Lindley amp; Hutton was adopted in 1843 by Braun, who called the plant Baieranbsp;furcata, but in 1865 Heer named some fragments of leaves fromnbsp;Keuper beds of Switzerland SclerophjUina furcata, and afterwardsnbsp;�substituted the generic name Baiera, possibly in ignorance of thenbsp;use of the same name by Braun in 1843.

Baiera Bindley ana may be compared with B. spetshergensis, Hath.,' from the Upper Jurassic of Advent Baj', also with B. tenuifolia,nbsp;Johnst.,'' from the Jerusalem Coal-basin of Tasmania.

V. 3682. PL IX. Fig. 6.

Similar in form to Baiera gracilis, except in the narrower and more frequently branched segments. The tips of the segmentsnbsp;are obtusely pointed as in B. gracilis. The Lcckenby Collection,nbsp;Cambridge, contains some specimens of B. Lindleyana in which thenbsp;narrow segments are more widely spread, giving the leaf a broadernbsp;form similar to that of B. gracilis, as shown in PI. IX. Fig. 3.

This example occurs on the same slab with the leaf of B. gracilis represented in Fig. 5; it has segments intermediate in breadthnbsp;between V. 3682 (Fig. 6) and the narrower forms of B. gracilis.

A tuft of partially expanded leaves similar to B. microphjlla (no doubt a young leaf of B. LinSlmjana), as figured by Phillips.nbsp;This specimen is practically identical with some of the fossilsnbsp;figured by Heer as examples of Czehanowskia.

3. Baiera Phillipsi, Xathorst.

The specimen on which Phillips founded the species Sphenopteris longifoUa is shown in Text-fig. 47. If this drawing, which wasnbsp;carefully made from the type-specimen, bo compared with Phillips�nbsp;figure, it will be seen to boar a somewhat closer resemblance tonbsp;a leaf of the Baiera type than is suggested by the originalnbsp;illustration. The example .shown in Fig. 4, PL IX., is practicallynbsp;identical with the type-specimen. There is but little differencenbsp;between the present type of leaf and some of the more deeplynbsp;dissected and narrower lobed forms of Ginkgo digitata (of thenbsp;shape usually referred to Oinhgo Iluttoni) on the one hand, andnbsp;Baiera gractUs on the other. It is convenient, however, to retainnbsp;a definite specific name for this form of leaf, with its linear andnbsp;bluntly terminated segments, as it constitutes a fairly distinctivenbsp;type. The specific name longifoUa xvas applied by Pomel to a leafnbsp;of somewhat similar but not identical form, which he named

Dicropteris longifolia; Pomel�s plant was siipscquently spoken of by Heer and other authors as Baiera longifolia.

To avoid confusion between Phillips� English plant and PomePs species, laathorst proposed to name the former Baiera Pliillipsi,nbsp;a name which may well be adopted. It is true that Phillips usednbsp;the specific name longifolia several years before Pomel applied thenbsp;same term to a distinct plant, but the long-established use of Baieranbsp;longifolia in Pomcl�s sense renders it advisable to adopt the newnbsp;name PhilUpsi for the English species.

Baiera Phillipsi agrees closely with some forms of Ginlcgo sihirica and G. lepicla as described by Heer from northern latitudes.

A comparison may bo made also with Ginlcgo sihirica ' as figured by Geyler from Japan.

The Ehsetic leaves figured by Schenk- as Baiera tmniata bear a close resemblance to B. Phillipsi.

V. 3301. PI. IX. Eig. 4. A single leaf occurring with several others of the same type on a largo slab of rock. This specimen isnbsp;precisely similar to the type-specimen of Sphenopteris longifolia,

Text - fig. 47. (Type - specimen of Phillips� Splietwpteris longifolia\ in the York Collection.) This species, not quitenbsp;� correctly figured by Phillips, is of the same type as V. 3301nbsp;(PI. IX. Pig. 4). Length of leaf 6�5 cm.

V. 3301. Narrow leaves, often with four segments, which may he broader than in the leaf shown in Pig. 4, PL IX. Of. B. gracilisnbsp;(PL IX. Pig. 5).

39,210. This affords an example of a leaf intermediate between the typical B. Phillipsi and Ginhgo digitata, forma Iluttoni, asnbsp;shown in PL IX. Pigs. 2 and 10. The lamina is more deltoid innbsp;shape, and narrower than in such a leaf as that shown in Pig. 2,nbsp;PL IX., but a comparison of the more broadly lobed forms placednbsp;in the species B. Phillipsi with some examples of Ginkgo digitata,nbsp;forma Huttoni, leads to a strong .suspicion that no satisfactorynbsp;specific distinctions can be drawn between the various forms ofnbsp;leaves from the Lower Oolite rocks referred to the genera Ginkgonbsp;and Baiera.

Genus BEANIA.

The genus Beania was instituted by Carruthers in 1869 for a specimen from Gristhorpe, and diagnosed as follows:�

�Pcmalofruit composed of scales arranged in loose spikes; scales stalked and peltate, supporting two ovoid sessile seeds, one on eachnbsp;side of the pedicel.�

The general structure, of Beania is very similar, as Carruthers pointed out, to that of the female flower of the Cycadean genusnbsp;Zamia, except that the individual carpophylls are farther apartnbsp;than in the recent species. If we imagine the internodes of the axisnbsp;of a Zamia strobilus considerably elongated, we have a structure

closely resembling that of Beania. The affinity of the genus is-consiclered at length in the account of the species B. gracilis^ Some imperfect fragments recently described by Shirley fromnbsp;Ipswich, Queensland, as Beania geminata, are too indefinite to benbsp;determined.'

Beania gracilis, Carruthers.

fig. 2.

1869. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Beania gracilis, Carruthers, Geol. Mag. vol. vi. p. 1, pi. iv. fig. 1.

1870. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Beania gracilis, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. ii. p. 206.

1875. Beania gracilis, Saporta, Pal. Fran9. vol. ii. pp. 59, 63, pi. Ixxvii.. fig. 3.

Type-specimen. Xo. 45,040, British Museum (PI. IX. Fig. 11).. Type of Phillips� fig. 2, pi. viii. {Geol. Tories.), in the Yorknbsp;Museum. Type of Lindley amp; Hutton, in the Oxford Museum.

A central, fairly stout woody axis, bearing scattered and loosely disposod secondary axes at right angles to the main axis; thesenbsp;secondary axes, xvhioh arc probably of the nature of carpophylls,nbsp;have the form of slender pedicels terminating in a peltate distalnbsp;expansion, on the inner side of which are borne two oval or suh-spherioal seeds with a fleshy outer coat.

The original diagnosis given hy Carruthers is as follows:��Axi,s of the female inflorescence slender; scales or slender stalks placed

at right angles to the axis, peltate, apex of the scale small, scarcely covering the ripe seeds; seeds sessile, ovoid, slightly acuminate atnbsp;the apex, symmetrically arranged on the two sides of the pedicel,nbsp;reflexed.�

The author of the species points out the close resemblance of Bemiia gracilis to the female flower of the Cycadean genusnbsp;Zamia; it agrees with such a strohilus as that of Z. muricata,nbsp;Willd. (figured by Carruthors), �except that the apices of thenbsp;scales are not adpressed, but the scales are scattered over the axisnbsp;so as to form a very loose spike.�

The two specimens figured by Lindley amp; Hutton in 1835 as Sphmreda paradoxa may possibly belong to the same species, butnbsp;the fossil shown in fig. 1 of the Fossil Flora has a much broadernbsp;axis and apparently smaller seeds than that shown in fig. 2. Thenbsp;latter, as Carruthers notices in his paper, is identical with Beanianbsp;gracilis-, I have not been able to find the original specimen of fig. 1,nbsp;and without more evidence than is afforded by the drawing itnbsp;is impossible to be certain as to its real nature. It may representnbsp;a flower of similar form to that of Beania gracilis, but specificallynbsp;distinct. Lindley amp; Hutton express no definite opinion as to thenbsp;nature of the fossils which they name Sphmreda paradoxa.

In the third edition of Phillips� Geology of Yorhsliire a figure is given of a specimen identical with Carruthers� type, and the opinionnbsp;expressed that it �may possibly be the rhizome of a fern witlinbsp;young fronds in the circinate condition.� �

Schimper classes Beania gracilis among the Cycads, and suggests that the greater elongation of the internodes between thenbsp;carpophylls, as compared with the more closely packed carpophyllsnbsp;of recent Cycads, may be due, in part, to growth in length afternbsp;fertilization of the ovules.�� This is hardly likely ; the looser habitnbsp;of the flower is no doubt an original character, and one whiclinbsp;forms an interesting peculiarity of this Jurassic species. Thenbsp;suggestion of Saporta that this loose habit of Beania gracilis maynbsp;he due to the fall of some of the carpophylls cannot be accepted ;nbsp;an examination of several specimens of this species enables me tonbsp;assert that there is no evidence to support such a view.�

Single seeds, like that figured by Phillips as a � winged seed,� are not uncommon; there is no trace of a wing in the examplenbsp;figured by Phillips (original specimen in the York Museum), hutnbsp;the coat is considerably wrinkled, a character well marked innbsp;Beania seeds, and pointing to a thick fleshy integument such asnbsp;that of the seeds of the recent genus Cycas.

It is difficult to decide by what Jurassic plant Beania gracilis was borne. Carruthers and other authors compare the flower withnbsp;those of Zamia and other recent Cycads, and would presumablynbsp;connect it with one of the numerous Cycads of Lower Oolite agenbsp;which bore pinnate Cycadean fronds. So far as we know, thenbsp;abundant Cycadean fronds belonged to plants with Bennettitcannbsp;flowers; this is, I believe, proved to be the case in Zamites gigagnbsp;(Williamsonia gigas), which bore the well - known Williamsonianbsp;type of flower; and it is very probable that the plant with thenbsp;common fronds described by Bindley amp; Hutton as Pterophyllumnbsp;pecten boro the flowers known as Williamsonia Lechenbyi, Nath.nbsp;The Cycadean trunks from Maryland and Dakota in America, and thenbsp;species known as Bennettites Gilsonianus of England, also the variousnbsp;Bennettites stems of Italy and elsewhere, produced floral structuresnbsp;very different from those of recent Cycads, and hardly comparablenbsp;to such a type as that of Beania gracilis. We have, indeed, nonbsp;satisfactory instance of a female Cycadean flower of Mesozoicnbsp;age which can be reasonably connected with a plant hearingnbsp;Cycadean foliage. The splendid Cycadean fronds which Heernbsp;has figured from the Cretaceous of Greenland as Cycas Steenstrupi,^nbsp;is represented as associated with a fossil hearing a distinctnbsp;resemblance to a carpophyll of the Cycas type ; but an examinationnbsp;of the type-specimen in the Copenhagen Museum convinced menbsp;that the drawing of the supposed carpophyll does not accuratelynbsp;represent the facts. There is nothing on the slab containingnbsp;the well - preserved Cycadean frond which can he reasonablynbsp;compared with the carpel of Cycas. It is true there are a fewnbsp;stems, such as Cycadeoidea gigantea.. Sew., which show no tracenbsp;of Bennettitcan flowers, but these are exceptional, and it mustnbsp;be admitted that such evidence as we have points to the conclusionnbsp;that the majority of the Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous Cycads

Avoro members of the Bennettitem, and did not conform in the characters of their reproductive organs to the existing membersnbsp;of the Cycadaceffi.

Is it possible, therefore, that Beania graeilis may have belonged to Oinkgo or some other member of the Ginkgoacese ? We arenbsp;familiar with male flowers in the Yorkshire rocks which agi'eenbsp;with those of the maidenhair-tree, and in all probability were bornenbsp;by species of Ginkgo, but as yet wo have no evidence of thenbsp;existence in Britain of female flowers of the modern Ginkgo typo.nbsp;Heer has described a few fragments from the Arctic regions,nbsp;recalling the female flowers of Ginkgo hiloba, but no satisfactorynbsp;�specimens are known. There is, indeed, a considerable differencenbsp;between Beania gracilis and the female flowers of Ginkgo as theynbsp;exist at the present day, but it is conceivable that the Mesozoicnbsp;representatives of this genus, which exhibits so many points ofnbsp;contact with the Cyoads, may have possessed reproductive organsnbsp;more nearly related to those of recent Cycads than is the case withnbsp;the surviving species. The male flowers of both fossil and recentnbsp;Ginkgos consist of a central axis, bearing loosely disposed stamens,nbsp;and are constructed on the same plan as Beania gracilis. The usualnbsp;and normal female flowers of Ginkgo hiloba consist of a strong axisnbsp;bearing two terminal sessile ovules, but it is not uncommon to findnbsp;examples in which the main axis bears several ovules, irregularlynbsp;arranged and separated by fairly long internodes, borne on slendernbsp;pedicels inclined at a considerable angle to the stouter central axis.nbsp;Such abnormal flowers are of importance as at least showingnbsp;�a possible variation in the structure of the female reproductivenbsp;shoot, and they afford a nearer approach to the type representednbsp;by Beania. The agreement is by no means perfect; in the Ginkgonbsp;�flowers the ovules are terminal, and the apex points outwards, whilenbsp;in Beania they are attached to the inner side of a peltate expansionnbsp;of the carpophyll. But this is a difference insufficient to invalidatenbsp;a comparison. If we imagine the ovules of Ginkgo turned throughnbsp;an angle of 180� we should have the collar-like envelo^je occupyingnbsp;�the same position as the peltate expansion in Beania. Some of thenbsp;abnormal flowers of Ginkgo, such as those figured by Fuji!' and onenbsp;recently figured by Miss Gowan and myself, approach more closely

to the JBeanta type, an(t it is not improbable that these example� indicate ancestral features, as CelakoTsky' has suggested. quot;Withoutnbsp;wishing to overstrain such arguments as may he adduced in favournbsp;of this view, we prefer to regard Beemia gracilis as a female flower,nbsp;which was more probably home by a plant belonging to thenbsp;Ginkgoaocse than by a member of the true Cycadaceae.

A type of flower similar to Beania has been described by Nathorst as Zamiostrohus stenoracliis, from the Rhsetic plant-bods-of Scania.^

The main features of the type - specimen are -well shown in Carruthers� drawing, but the central axis and the wrinkled seedsnbsp;are rather more clearly reproduced in Fig. 11, PI. IX.

Genus CZEKANOWSKIA.

Heer places the genus Czehanowshia among the Coniform, and defines it as follows :�

� Folia numerosa in ramulo abbreviate caduco fasciculato, subulata, rigida, dicliotoma, squamis compluribus persistentibusnbsp;circumdata. Flores feminei racemosi. Fnietus pedunculo brevinbsp;insidens, nuculis duabus valde approximatis.�

The long and narrow needle-like loaves, originally placed by Lindlcy amp; Hutton � in the genus Solenites and compared by themnbsp;with the recent Isoetes, arc considered by Heer to belong to

:a Ginligo-liko tree in 'which the short shoots were tlocicluous. The form of the needles suggests a comparison -with Finns, Larix, ornbsp;Cedrus, hut the distinct forking in several of the Siberian examplesnbsp;�described by Heer led that author to cite the maidenhair-treenbsp;{Ginhgo) as the more probable type -with -which to compare thenbsp;fossils. In some of the more perfect specimens the tuft of longnbsp;needles is enclosed at the base by a fe-w small scale-leaves, as innbsp;the short shoots of Finns and Larix. Several of Heer�s specimensnbsp;�exhibit numerous oval swellings on the leaves, -which it is suggestednbsp;may possibly represent spores; but if the plant is a Conifer, andnbsp;not a Vascular Cryptogam, it is possible, he suggests, that thesenbsp;swellings arc the result of the ravages of a fungus.

The frequent association of small seeds with the leaves of Czekanowshia led Heer to regard the two as parts of the same plant.nbsp;The two Siberian species instituted by Heer, Czekanowshia rigidanbsp;and C. setacea, closely resemble one another, and it is, I believe,nbsp;impossible to separate the two forms by any satisfactory differences.

In 1873 Saporta^ included Solenites under Unger�s genus Jeanpaulia-, but in a later work^ both Jeanpaulia and Solenites arenbsp;transferred to Saporta�s genus TrieliopUgs, founded on a Permiannbsp;plant, T. heteromorplia. Saporta refers more particularly to thenbsp;typo named by Lindley amp; Hutton Solenites furcata. By mostnbsp;authors, such specimens as those originally named by Lindley amp;nbsp;Hutton Solenites Mnrrayana are placed in the genus Czekanowshia,nbsp;�and refeiTcd to the Coniferse. Schimper,� on the other hand,nbsp;includes Solenites Murraijana in the genus Isoetes. The form ofnbsp;the leaves and their occurrence in tufts lend support to thenbsp;comparison with this genus, but the occurrence of the scale-leavesnbsp;forms a point of resemblance to coniferous shoots. Solms-Laubaohnbsp;includes Solenites Mnrrayana as a possible member of the Isoetete,nbsp;but expresses considerable doubt as to its true position; he pointsnbsp;out the desirability of examining the structure of the epidermis tonbsp;ascertain if stomata are present, a character, ho adds, which wouldnbsp;.strengthen the comparison with Czekanowshia. The thin carbonaceous film representing the needle-like leaves of Solenites

frequently peels off the surface of the rock, and may bo readily cleared for microscopical examination hy means of Schulze�s-macerating solntion. Several pieces of leaf have hoon prepared innbsp;this way, and in some instances rendered more distinct hy stainingnbsp;with safranin; the outlines of the epidermal cells standout clearly,nbsp;and rows of stomata, with oval guard-cells, extend along thenbsp;length of the needles.

The form of the cells is shown in the small piece of cuticle-represented in Fig. 48; the fragment is not large enough to demonstrate the occurrence of numerous stomata in rows, hut ifnbsp;a strip of loaf he carefully prepared and mounted, the manner ofnbsp;occurrence of the guard-cells is at once apparent. In the majority

of the species of Isoetes there are very few or no stomata, but in the land-forms, 1. Burimi, Bory, and I. Uystrix, Boiy, stomata arenbsp;abundant.' An examination of a leaf of the latter species revealsnbsp;about four rows of stomata which occur over two largo air-spaces;nbsp;hut the resemblance of the epidermal cells to those of Solenites is-much less striking than in the case of coniferous needles. I havenbsp;no hesitation in expressing the opinion that the structure of thesenbsp;Jurassic leaves agrees most closely with that of the needles ofnbsp;recent Conifers, and affords confirmatory evidence in favour ofnbsp;classing Solenites or C%ekanowshia among the Coniferse. Thenbsp;examination of the epidermal cells of Solenites (Czekanowshia) led

'We have as yet no absolute proof of any organic connection between the reproductive organs described by Heer and thenbsp;Czeianowskia leaves, hut the evidence, so far as it goes, favoursnbsp;the view that needles and seeds belong to the same plant.

The surface of the shale from the Yorkshire plant-beds is occasionally covered with an accumulation of the fine grass-likenbsp;leaves of CzekamwsJcia, reminding one of the crowded needlesnbsp;carpeting the ground in a pine forest ; some of the Siberiannbsp;specimens are met with in similar profusion on the surface of thenbsp;rock, and in the Hew Jersey Amboy clays a species of Czelcanowshanbsp;occurs in equal abundance.^

Several authors have represented Czelcanowshia leaves as occasionally dichotomously branched, a character in favour ofnbsp;a comparison with Baiera and the Ginkgoaccie ; among thenbsp;numerous examples of the leaves of Czehanowslcia Murrayana thatnbsp;I have examined, no absolutely certain case of branching wasnbsp;found. The long unbranohed leaves of Czelcanowshia remind onenbsp;of the needles of Pinus longifolia, Salisb., and other long-leavednbsp;pines, but the branched type of leaf met with in some formsnbsp;of the fossil genus is not in accord with a comparison betweennbsp;Czehanowskia and the Ahietinem. We may for the present regardnbsp;this genus as a Conifer of doubtful affinity, and as possiblynbsp;a member of the Ginkgoacem.

Czekanowskia Murrayana (Lindley amp; Hutton).

1829. Flahellaria? viminea, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, pp. 148 and 154, pi. x. fig. 12.

1895. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cf. CzekanowsMa eapillaris, Newberry, U.S. Monograph, xxvi. p. 61,

1896. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;CzehanoivsTcia riyida, Hartz, Med. om Gr�nland, pis. xvii., xviii.

The name Flabdlaria ? viminea, applied by Phillips to an imperfect specimen of Czekanowshia Murrayana, never came intonbsp;general use, and, in spite of the few years� priority of Phillips�nbsp;term, it is better to adopt the better known name of Lindley amp;nbsp;Hutton, by whom the plant was first described. A specimen innbsp;the Whitby Museum (Ho. 2493) labelled Flahellaria viminea isnbsp;possibly the type of Phillips.

The type-specimen of Lindley amp; Hutton, obtained from Gristhorpe Bay, was compared by these authors with Isoetes and Pilularia,nbsp;also with grasses and other monocotyledons. The bladder-likenbsp;swellings shown in their figure are no doubt due to the partialnbsp;peeling off and separation of the carbonaceous film from thenbsp;surface of the shale; no definite swellings like those representednbsp;in the fossil flora can be detected in the specimen. Their drawingnbsp;of the epidermal cells does not afford any indication of thenbsp;occurrence of stomata, but in all the leaves of which I havenbsp;c.x:amined fragments under the microscope stomata are abundantnbsp;(Fig. 48).

In the third edition of the Geology of the Yorkshire Coast, Solenites Murrayana is compared with the more slender examplesnbsp;of Baiera gracilis.

A comparison of several specimens of Heer�s two Siberian species, Czehanotoskia rigida and C. setacea, in the Museumnbsp;Collection, leads mo to regard some of the examples of both thesenbsp;� species � as identical with the type-specimen of Lindley amp; Huttonnbsp;(Fig, 49); others differ from the type in their greater frequencynbsp;of the dichotomous branching of the individual leaves, and agreenbsp;more closely with the specimens named by Lindley amp; Hutton

Solenites furcata} 'Williamson pointed out, in a note to Lindley, that the numerous needles of Solenites Murrayana occasionallynbsp;�over the surface of a hed of shale ; this manner of occurrencenbsp;is illustrated by specimens in the Leckenhy Collection, Whithy

(Museum, and elsewhere, and the same profusion of needles is seen injsomo of the Siberian specimens. In most of the (hnglishnbsp;�examples, where it is possible to trace the needles for some

distance, there is no indication of forking, but in a few cases there-appear to he indications of dichotomy. Nathorst, in a letter to Heer,' expressed the opinion that the leaves of the Englishnbsp;examples were unhranched, but, as he pointed out, there is.nbsp;considerable difficulty, owing to the crowding of the leaves, innbsp;tracing a single leaf throughout its entire length. In Heer�snbsp;specimens the needles are often single, and the usual absence ofnbsp;forking in the Yorkshire specimens is no serious obstacle to theirnbsp;identity with some of the Siberian fossils. As the name givennbsp;by Lindley amp; Hutton is much older than those of Heer, and seeingnbsp;that we have the typc-speoimen of Solenites Murrayana beforenbsp;us, it is probably the better plan to retain the older specificnbsp;name, including under that designation some of the examplesnbsp;figured by Heer as Czehanowshia rigida and as C. setaeea. Thenbsp;generic name Czekanowahia, which has come into general use, maynbsp;be substituted for Solenites.

The fragmentary nature of the specimens of Czelcanowshia, and the wide distribution of the genus in rocks of various ages, rendernbsp;an accurate specific determination practically impossible. In thenbsp;English specimens we seldom find any trace of the scale-leaves ornbsp;the very short axis which boars the needles, and the resemblance ofnbsp;isolated needles alone is of little value as an index of identity or closenbsp;affinity. Such a fossil as Hathorst^ has figured from the Hhoeticnbsp;beds of Stabbarp in Scania as Czekanoivahia rigida appears identicalnbsp;with some of the Yorkshire specimens, but it would be rash tonbsp;definitely include the Swedish and English examples in one species.

Type-specimen. The type - specimen of Lindley amp; Hutton is Ho. 3685 in the British Museum Collection. (Text-fig. 49.)

Heedle-like leaves borne in tufts on deciduous short shoots, suri�ounded at the base by small imbricate scale-loaves; the foliage-leaves usually about 1 mm. in breadth or somewhat narrower, andnbsp;reaching a length of over 17 cm. The needles are in most casesnbsp;unhranched, but occasionally forked; the epidermis consists ofnbsp;rectangular cells slightly longer than broad; numerous stomatanbsp;occur in longitudinal rows, separated by a few rows of epidermalnbsp;cells without stomata.

Our knowledge of tlie organs of reproduction is hardly sufidcient to enable us to diagnose the flowers or seeds. No well-markednbsp;veins can be detected on the leaves, but the surface is finelynbsp;striated; in all probability the substance of the leaf was too thicknbsp;to allow of the slender veins being visible exteruallj%

Several imperfectly preserved leaves converging towards a supporting axis, which is not preserved. The bladder-like swellings-

represented in the figure of the Fossil Flora arc not present iii' the specimen, but no doubt the uplifted pieces of the lamina havenbsp;become detached from the surface of the shale since the originalnbsp;drawing was made.

V. 3684. Text-fig. 50. This is one of the few specimens which shows any trace of the short axis and the scale-leaves; the shortnbsp;leaf bent downwards close to the axis may be a detached scale-leaf,,nbsp;as figured in similar specimens by Heer.

V. 3686. Another smaller specimen showing the short and thick axis of the short shoot; hut the details are not clear.

V. 3687. iS'eedles loss than 1 mm. in width; the lamina showing here and there a tendency to peel off the shale, suggesting thenbsp;swellings represented by Lindley amp; Hutton.

39,282. Tufts of long and slender needles, in some places showing apparent indications of forking; but in no case is itnbsp;possible to be certain that forking actually occurs. Labellednbsp;by Bean Sohnites Murrayana. The very slender needles reachnbsp;a length of 15 cm., and are �5 cm. in breadth. In one tuft thenbsp;short basal portion is indistinctly preserved.

Araucarites Phillipsi, Carrutliers.

1869. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Arauoar�es 1�hiUips�, Carrutliers, Geol. Mag. vol. vi. [l],p. 6, pl. h..

1870. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Araiioaria Fhillipsii, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. �. p. 254.

The species Araucarites Ph�Uipsn was founded by Carrutbers on some single scales, and on an imperfect rolled specimen of a femalenbsp;cone. He gives the following description ;�

� Scales from the centre of the cone cuneate, nearly as broad as long, lower scales thickish throughout, without membranousnbsp;wings.�

The detached scales of this .species are frequently met with in collections of Inferior Oolite plants, but no good specimen has beennbsp;found showing the cone as a whole. Occasionally single seeds arcnbsp;found detached from the scales ; these are elliptical in form, andnbsp;slightly more than 1 cm. in length. Although the material onnbsp;which Carruthers founded his species is somewhat meagre, therenbsp;can bo no reasonable doubt that it affords trustworthy evidence ofnbsp;the existence of cones of the Araucarian type. The occurrence of

Araucarian cones in the Wealclen rocks of Sussex' and such specimens as Araucarites Sudlestoni, Carr.,^ from the Corallinenbsp;Oolite of Yorkshire, affords proof of the comparative abundancenbsp;of Araucarian species in Mesozoic floras; hut as yet we are not innbsp;a position to do more than suggest what form of vegetative shootsnbsp;were home by these species of Araucarites. It is, however, verynbsp;probable that the twigs of quot;Wealden and Inferior Oolite age referrednbsp;to Fontaine�s genus Nageiopsis and Bunbury�s species Cryptomeritesnbsp;divaricatus were borne by plants closely allied to Araucaria.

The English Jurassic species may be compared with the Indian specimens described by Feistmantel as Araucarites cutehensis^ andnbsp;A. haohensis.*' Similar, but somewhat larger, cone-scales havenbsp;been described by Saporta under the name Araucaria Moreauana.

As Carmthers has pointed out, Araucarites Pliillipsi agrees most closely with the recent species of Araucaria included in the sectionnbsp;Columhea.

A single scale showing the form of the central seed. Labelled by Bean � seed of Cycadites.quot;

V. 2640. A large slab of sandstone with single scales of Araucarites and fragments of Braehyphjllum mamillare, Brongn.

Bunbury instituted this generic name as a designation for some specimens of Coniferous shoots which ho compared with Cryptonierianbsp;japonica, Don, and species of Araucaria ; he uses the term � withoutnbsp;meaning to affirm� that the species so named �is truly a congenernbsp;-of Cryptomeria japonica.quot;

1 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Seward (95), p. 190, pi. xii. figs. 1 and 2.nbsp;- Carruthers (77).

Cryptomerites divaricatus, Bunbury.

1851. Cryptomeritesl divaricatus, Bunbury, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. v�. p. 190, pl. xiii. �g. 4.

1864. Cryptomerites^. divaricatus, Leckeii�y, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 77.

1875. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cryptomerites divaricatus, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 230, ligu. 62.

1876. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;I�achyphyllum {Cryptomerites) divaricatum, Feistmantel, Pal. Ind. pl. x.

%� 1.

1877. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Cryptomerites divaricatus, Lebour, Illustrations Foss. Plants, pl. Ivii.

Type-specimen. The original of Biuihury�s figure is in the Iieokcnby Collection, Cambridge (Xo. 303).

In his description of the two specimens from the collection of Dl�. Murray on which the species was founded, Bunbury gives thenbsp;following diagnosis of the vegetative characters of the plant:�

�The main axis is stout, straight, and rigid; the branches and branchlets spread widely and stiffly, having a rigid and wirynbsp;: aspect, although the branchlets arc very slender and somewhatnbsp;zigzag. Leaves apparently two-ranked, mostly alternate, butnbsp;placed at very irregular intervals and often nearly opposite ; theynbsp;are compressed sideways, and taper regularly from the verticallynbsp;dilated decurrent base to a sharp point; are of rigid appearance,nbsp;most commonly straight, sometimes decidedly incurved; have nonbsp;prominent lateral rib or angle, but arc rather faintly and irregularlynbsp;sti�iated, perhaps in consequence of the shrinking of their tissue.nbsp;Those towards the base of each twig are often rather stouter thannbsp;the rest.�

Biinbury compares the specimens with Crypfomeria japoniea, but rho also recognizes a resemblance to Araucaria excelsa, B. Br., andnbsp;A. Cunninghamii, Ait.

Xathorst' has drawn attention to the resemblance between Cryptomerites divaricatus and the sterile branches of some forms of

Araucaria (section Eutacta). In the absence of reproductive-structures it is difficult to form an opinion as to the affinities of this plant, but the striking similarity which the loaves and the form ofnbsp;the branches of the fossil type bear to the recent Australian speciesnbsp;Araucaria CunningJiamii, Ait., leads me to favour the view of thenbsp;Araucarian relationship of Bunbury�s species.

I have little doubt as to the specific identity of the specimens named by Phillips Cryptomerites rigidus with 0. clivaricatus, Bunb.nbsp;This Conifer is represented by a very small number of specimens-in collections of Inferior Oolite plants; the best specimens I have-seen are Bunbury�s type-specimen (Leckenby Collection) and a fewnbsp;good examples in the Manchester Museum.

This generic name was chosen by Professor Fontaine for certain-vegetative shoots bearing a resemblance in the form of the leaves to recent species of the genus Podoearpus, included in the sectionnbsp;Nageia, in which the leaves possess numerous veins and notnbsp;a single midrib.' As no reproductive organs have been foundnbsp;in connection with the vegetative shoots of Nageiopsis, the positionnbsp;of the genus cannot be definitely fixed. While admitting thenbsp;marked similarity between Fontaine�s genus and certain speciesnbsp;of Podocarpm, a comparison may also be made, as Nathorst hasnbsp;suggested, with the Australian Conifer Araucaria Bidwillii, Hook.,

Nageiopsis anglica, sp. nov.

Type-specimen. Whitby Museum (2503). (Text-fig. 51.) Leaves distichous, attached to the short axis by a narrow base,nbsp;broadly linear in form, from 1 to l�5cm. in length, traversed bynbsp;several parallel veins, which converge slightly towards the leaf-base.

This species is founded on some specimens in the Whitby Museum which are too fragmentary to admit of a satisfactory

diagnosis. The close agreement between the English specimens and some of the larger fossils referred by Fontaine, in hisnbsp;Monograph of the Potomac Flora, to the genus Mageiopsis, leadsnbsp;me to adopt this name, although it is not improbable that thenbsp;genus Araucaria may prove to be the nearest lirag representative.nbsp;A specimen of similar form to that from the Inferior Oolite ofnbsp;Yorkshire has been described from the Wealden beds of Sussex,'nbsp;but the two types are probably not specifically identical.

One of the Whitby specimens (2377) bears a label on which is written �Probably the leaves of Araucaria PhillipsiP Nathorst,nbsp;in his notes on English specimens, refers to what is probably thenbsp;same plant; he speaks of fragments of branches in the Whitby

Fio. bX.~Nageiopsis anglica, sp. uov. (j nat. size.) From a specimen in the Whitby Mu.seiini (Xo. 2503).

Museum resembling Araucaria (sect. Golumbea), in appearance like Zamites, but in their branched form resembling Araucarianbsp;Bidtvilli, Hook.^

Without more evidence we cannot decide definitely between the Podocariiem and Araucariinaj as the family in which to includenbsp;the vegetative shoots referred to the genus Nageiopsis, but on thenbsp;whole the comparison with Araucaria is more likely to be nearernbsp;the truth.

The English specimens, which I have described for the sake of convenience under a distinct specific name, may prove to be

identical with one ol the American forms figured by Pontaine ; the Potomac species Nageiopds microphylla, Pont., N. descrescem, Pont.,nbsp;and others * are very similar to the Whithy fragments.

This fragment shows clearly the form and disposition of the broadly linear leaves, 1-2-1'5 cm. in length; the axis of thenbsp;specimen has a length of 3 cm.

Another specimen (2377) in the Whitby Collection consists of several pieces of branches similar to that shown in the figure ;nbsp;in one fragment the axis of the shoot is branched, as in thenbsp;Wealden specimen already referred to. Each leaf is traversed bynbsp;several parallel veins, which converge slightly towards the pointnbsp;of attachment of the narrow leaf-base.

Genus PAGIOPHYLLUM, Heer.

Saporta ^ and other authors incline to the view that the species included in Heer�s genus should be regarded as members of thenbsp;Araucarine�, but this opinion is based very largely on a similaritynbsp;of vegetative structures, which does not receive decisive supportnbsp;from such evidence as is afforded by the more importantnbsp;reproductive structures. While recognizing the possibility ofnbsp;a close relationship between this widespread Mesozoic genus andnbsp;Araucaria^ it is safer to regard Pagiophyllum as one of thenbsp;numerous extinct forms which cannot be safely included in anynbsp;particular family of the Coniferse. It is difficult to drawnbsp;a satisfactory line between the genera Pagiophylltm and Ehtides,nbsp;and perhaps the English Jurassic species, which I have placednbsp;in the former genus, should rather be refen-ed to Heer's genusnbsp;Elatides, the name under which Hathorst� has recently included thenbsp;plant described by Lindley amp; Hutton as Lycopodites Willimnsonis.

Pagiophyllum Williamsoni (Brongniart).

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Lycopodites tmoifoliws, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 147, pi. viii. fig. 3.nbsp;1833. Lycopodites JFiUiamsonis, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. ii.

1849. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Moreaimia Williamsonis, Pomel, Amt. Bericht. Versam. Naturforsch.

1850. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Lycopodites JFiUiamsonis, Unger, Gen. spec, plant, loss. p. 273.

1851. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Palissya? JFiUiamsonis, Bunbury, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soo. vol. vii.

1864. Lycopodites JFiUiamsonis, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. toI. xx. p. 76.

1870. Pachyphyllum JFiUiamsoni, Schimper, Trait, pal. v�g. vol. ii. p. 251. 1875. JFalchia IFiUiamsonis, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, p. 230, pi. viii. figs. 1nbsp;and 3, lign. 61.

1884. Pachyphyllum ? JFiUiamsoni, Saporta, Pal. Franc;, vol. iii. p. 306, pi. clxii. fig.s. 1, 2.

1894. Cf. Pagiophyllum falcatum, Bartholin, Bot. Tidsskrift, p. 100, pi. v. fig. 4.

1897. Elatides JFiUiamsonis, Xathorst, Mesoz. Flora Spitzbergens, p. 34. 1900. Pagiophyllum JFilliamsoni, Seward, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc.nbsp;vol. xliv. p. 16.

Type-speeimen. The specimens figured by Lindley amp; Hutton (pi. xciii. figs. 1 and 2) are in the ilanohester Museum (Xos. 16nbsp;and 48). The original of Phillips� figure (pi. viii. fig. 1) is innbsp;the York Museum.

Vegetative shoots are monopodially branched, the latest branches being given off at an acute angle; the leaves, which are thick andnbsp;�fleshy, angular in form, and with a falcate, acuminate, and dorsallynbsp;keeled distal portion, are crowded and spirally disposed.

The female cones, about 6 cm. in length, consist of a central axis, bearing imbricate scales with broadly acuminate tips; the malenbsp;�cones have a length of rather more than 2 cm.; the sporophyllsnbsp;are given off at right angles from a fairH stout axis; they have

a triangular apical portion, at right angles to the sporophyll axis,, which is characterized hy a median vertical heel.

As the list of s3monyins shows, this fairlj' common species has been referred to various genera ; that it is a Conifer there is nO�nbsp;longer any doubt, both male and female cones having been foundnbsp;in organic connection with the vegetative branches. It is, however,nbsp;a little difficult to decide in which family of the Conifer�nbsp;Paffiophyllum Willmmmii should ho included. The form of thenbsp;leaves and the general appearanoo of the branches at once suggestnbsp;a comparison with certain species of Araucaria, c.g. Araucarianbsp;ezcelsa, R. Br., the Norfolk Island pine, hut such knowledge asnbsp;we possess as to the structure of the cones does not enable usnbsp;to decide the question of Arancarian affinity. The male flowersnbsp;are not sufficiently well preserved to afford any decisive ovidonconbsp;as to the number of the pollen-sacs or their manner of attachmentnbsp;to the stamens; their external form agrees closelj� with that of thenbsp;male flowers of various tj'pos of the Ahietino�, and in itself doesnbsp;not supplj� confirmatory evidence of a close relationship withnbsp;Araucaria.

The present species hears a close resemblance to Pagiophyllum peregrinum (L. amp; H.), of Liassic ago, described from the Englishnbsp;Lias and elsewhere. Some of the coniferous twigs described undernbsp;Heer�s generic name Elatiies arc veiy similar to Pagiophyllumnbsp;Williamsoni ; as Hecr points out, the Siberian Jurassic speciesnbsp;Elatides falcata' resembles the English type, hut the leaves of thenbsp;latter arc much broader at the base. The distinction between thenbsp;two genera Pagiophyllum and Elatides is by no means well marked,nbsp;and either generic term might ho used as a suitable designation fornbsp;certain Mesozoic coniferous twigs.

Several specimens of this species are included in the collections of Whitby, Scarborough, Cambridge, and elsewhere ; both thenbsp;male and female cones arc not infrequently found in organicnbsp;connection with the vegetative shoots.

This specimen illustrates the characteristic falcate leaves and the form of the female cones borne on slender lateral branches.

The cones arc imperfectly preserved, and do not throw mucli light on the structural features.

40,543. PL X. Fig. 2. A single male cone, 2'2 cm. long and 6 mm. hroad. The individual sporophylls are fairly clearly shownnbsp;(Fig. 2i) ; on the distal end of each is a keel-like ridge.

39,312. Text-fig. .52. This specimen shows more clearly than that represented in PI. X. Fig. 3 the form of the scales of thenbsp;female cone. There are parts of three cones preserved, the most

perfect only is shown in the drawing; it is 4 cm. hroad and 2 cm. in diameter; the cone-scales os seen in side-view resemble thenbsp;foliage-leav'es, but they are rather less falcate.

39,313. A single cone, 6 cm. X 2'3 cm. ; many of the scales are imperfect, and present a truncated appearance; others shownbsp;the pointed triangular apex. Labelled by Bean Lycopoditesnbsp;uneifolius.

39,332. Several male cones, approximately 7 mm. broad and 2-2'5 cm. long; some are seen in longitudinal section, showing

a fairly short axis giving off the sporophylls at right angles. In some of the cones the triangular distal ends of the sporophylls arenbsp;clcarty seen.

40,519. A largo specimen showing clearly the habit of branching, which agrees with that of Pagiophyllum peregrinumnbsp;as figured by Saporta.

Other specimens: � V. 3575, 11,015, 13,524, 39,319, 39,325, 39,327 (labelled by Bean Lyeopodites tmeifoUus).

This generic term was instituted by Schimper as a substitute for Brongniart�s BrachyphjUum in the case of certain forms which donbsp;not conform to the vegetative characters of the typical species,nbsp;B. metmillwre. The species referred to Cheirolepis agree, as regardsnbsp;the form of the loaves, with Widdringtonia and Sequoia gigantea;nbsp;the cone-scales are described as bearing solitary seeds. The plantnbsp;which Schenk' named BraclifphjUum Muensteri is the type specie.snbsp;of Schimper�s genus.

Cheirolepis setosus (Phillips).

This species was instituted by Phillips in the third edition of his Geology of Yorhshire, and defined as follows:�

� Stem branching at obtuse angles, marked by alternate elongate cicatrices; leaves arranged round an axis, lanceolate, pointed, small,nbsp;short, crowded.�

The description is accompanied by a sketch made by Professor Williamson from a specimen in his collection.

The two examples shown in Text-figs. 53 a and b are, no doubt, identical with the typo of Phillips; the more acute angle at whichnbsp;the small branches are given off can hardly be regarded as anbsp;difference of specific importance. This type of Conifer is representednbsp;by a single specimen in the British Museum; those shown innbsp;Figs. 53a and b are from the Scarborough and Whitby Museumsnbsp;respectively. With such fragmentary material it is impossible tonbsp;construct any satisfactory diagnosis, and in the absence of cones wenbsp;cannot adduce evidence of a trustworthy character as to the probablenbsp;relationship of this rare form to recent genera. Such few specimensnbsp;as have been obtained seem to warrant the separation of this speciesnbsp;from Pagiopliyllum Willianisoiii\ the falcate and stiff loaves bearnbsp;a fairly close resemblance, on a small scale, to the large leaves ofnbsp;the latter species, but the much smaller size of the vegetative twigsnbsp;of Cheirolepis setosus and the somewhat different habit affordnbsp;distinctive characters.

The question of generic designation is not an easy one to decide in dealing with fragmentary branches of fossil Conifers. Thenbsp;twigs of this sirecies have not been found with any trace of cones,nbsp;and the only characters available are afforded by the habit andnbsp;the form and arrangement of the leaves. Certain authors havenbsp;used the genus Brachypliyllum in a wide sense, so as to includenbsp;branches with sharply pointed, small, and somewhat falcatenbsp;keeled leaves, as well as branches with closely adpressed broadnbsp;scale-leaves, such as occur in Brachyphyllmn mmnillare, Brongn.nbsp;It is better, however, to restrict this generic designation to fossilnbsp;Conifers in which the leaves are broad and inserted on thenbsp;stem by a rhomboidal base, and to include branches with thenbsp;narrow and more spreading leaves under different generic names.nbsp;There is the closest resemblance between the specimens represented in Fig. 53 and Brachyphyllmn Muensteri, as figured bynbsp;Schenk from beds of llhsetic age; ^ while hesitating to refer thenbsp;Yorkshire fossils to this species, the agreement of the vegetativenbsp;characters suggests specific identity. Saporta^ substitutes the

genus Clieirolepis for Brachjphyllum in describing Schenk�s Bi^eoios, and wisely restricts the application of the latter term. Thenbsp;Wealden Conifer, Sphenolepidium Kurrianum (Dunk.),' also hearsnbsp;a distinct resemblance to the Jurassic species ; but in bothnbsp;t^phenolepidium and Cheirolepis the nature of the cones is includednbsp;as an important generic character in the diagnosis. In the casenbsp;of Phillips� Brachypliyllum, setoswn we are without the importantnbsp;evidence which cones would supply, and it must be admitted that

the form of the vegetative branches alone is insufficient as a guide to affinity when we have to deal with such a type as thatnbsp;represented in Fig. 53.

While admitting the impossibility of determining with certainty the true generic nature of the specimens of this species, wenbsp;may adopt Cheirolepis as a generic designation in preference to

Bracliijphyllum, and as indicating the very close resemblance between the Yorkshire plant and Cheirolepis Muemteri, Schenk.

The vegetative shoots branch at a more acute angle than in Bracliyphyllum. The leaves are crowded, spirally disposed, fairlynbsp;stout, and falcate in form.

The fragments of this species resemble in habit Sequoia (jigantea, Lindl. amp; Gord., and may bo compared also with Araucaria Balamm^nbsp;Brongn. amp; Gris., and Bacrydium Franhlinii, Hook., but the materialnbsp;is too meagre and ill preserved to admit of a full diagnosis or ofnbsp;a satisfactory comparison with recent Conifers.

40,570. Several fragments similar to the Scarborough example (Tig. 53a) ; imperfect and fragmentary.

The genus Bracliyphyllum^ like many other fossil Conifers, cannot be safely assigned to any definite position among recentnbsp;genera. The habit of the branches and the form of the loavesnbsp;favour a comparison with some species of the Tasmanian genusnbsp;Artlirotaxis \ but we arc not in a position to speak with confidencenbsp;as to affinities of this common Mesozoic genus'.

Bracliyphyllum mamillare, Brongniart.

1829. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Thuites expaiisas, Phillips, Geol. Yorks, pp. 147 and 133, pi. x. tig- H-

1835. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Thuites expausus, Lindley amp; Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. iii. pi. clxvii.

Brachijphyllum maniiUare, Seliimper, Trait, pal. v�g-. vol. ii. p. 335,. B. Phillipsi, ibid. p. 336.

Braehyphyllum mamillare, ibid. pl. x. fig. 12 ; pl. xi. figs. 12 and 13.. Braehyphyllum mamillare, Saporta, Pal. Franc;, vol. iii. p. 326,.nbsp;pl. clxii. flgs. 3-7.

Braehyphyllum mamillare, Fox-Strangways, Tab. Foss. p. 137. Thuites expansus, ihiA. p. 141.

Braehyphyllum mamillare, Seward, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. vol. xliv. p. 17.

Type -specimen. Tlie original of pl. clxvii. of Linclley efc Hutton is in the Manchester Museum (No. 52).

In hahit the branches of Braehyphyllum mamillare resemble those of Arthrotaxis cupressoides, Don ; the bi-anches of different order are-given ol� at a fairly wide angle. The leaves are small, fleshy,nbsp;triangular in shape, with a median dorsal keel, crowded andnbsp;spirally disposed. There is no satisfactory evidence as to thenbsp;nature of the flowers.

There has been some confusion on the part of palseobotanical authors between Braehyphyllum mamillare, Drongn., and Thuitesnbsp;expansm, Stornb.; the specimens to which Phillix)8 and Lindley amp;nbsp;Hutton applied the latter name are undoubtedly identical withnbsp;those designated hy Brongniart Braehyphyllum mamillare.

The specimen from the Gristhorpe plant-hed, which is figured, by Lindley efe Hutton as Thuites expansus, is, I have no doubt,nbsp;specifically identical with the plant which these authors representnbsp;in plates clxxxviii. and ccxix. as Braehyphyllum mamillare. Thenbsp;specimen has a length of 9�5 cm., and represents an imperfectlynbsp;preserved twig, hearing short lateral branches clothed withnbsp;spirally disposed and fleshy broadly triangular scale-leaves, closelynbsp;adpressed to the axis. Each loaf terminates in a sharp) point,nbsp;and is traversed on the abaxial surface hy a fairly prominentnbsp;median ridge.'

Natliorst mentions a specimen whieli he found in a plant-hed on the Yorkshire coast as probably new to England and identicalnbsp;with the Indian Brachyphyllum mamillare of Eeistmantel, whichnbsp;Nathorst thinks is not specifically identical with Brongniart�snbsp;species/ Among the Yorkshire examples of Brachyphyllum I harenbsp;not discovered any specimens which appear to he specificallynbsp;distinct from B. mamillare.

This specimen serves to illustrate the characteristic habit of the species. The branch has a length of 12 cm., and gives off lateralnbsp;members at an angle of approximately 80�.

V. 2511. A fairly well preserved branch, labelled by Bean Brachyphyllum mamillare.

V. 264:0. A large slab with numerous fragments of branches ; also several seeds of Araucarites PMllipsi, Carr., and portions ofnbsp;stems of Equisetites columrmris (Brongn.).

V. 3296. Some of the loaves in this specimen show the dorsal rib and the triangular form of the apex; they are not very closelynbsp;adpressed to the branches, hut stand out from the axis and clearlynbsp;exhibit their pointed triangular form.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Purchased.

V. 3583. A fairly good specimen, Horn, long; the thick fleshy leaves are well showm.

10,380. In this specimen the leaves are more open in their arrangement and less closely adpressed to the stem than in thenbsp;more typical examples of the species.

Other specimens 2525, V. 2570, V. 2893, V. 3476, V. 3582,, 10,335, 10,338, 40,467.

In speaking of this generic name Brongniart points out its artificial character, and calls attention to the fact that severalnbsp;other recent Conifers agree very closely with the Yew in thenbsp;form of the vegetative shoots.^ In the absence of any evidencenbsp;as to tlie character of the flowers, we may conveniently retainnbsp;Brougniart�s genus lor the fragments described by Lcckenby fromnbsp;the Inferior Oolite of East Yorkshire.

3864. Cycaditos zanuoidcs, Leckenby, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soe. vol. .xx. p. 77, pi. viii. fig. 1.

1889. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Gf. Ccphalotaxopsis ramosa, Fontaine, Potomac Flora, pis. cvi.-cviii.

'fi/pe-specimen. The specimen figured by Leckenby is in the IVoodwardian Museum, Cambridge (Xo. 286). The vegetativenbsp;shoots resemble those of Taxus haccata, Sequoia sempervirens, andnbsp;other recent species; , they consist of a slender axis bearing narrownbsp;linear loaves, traversed by a single median vein. The leaves arenbsp;spirally disposed and more or less closely set. Flowers unknown.

The fragment to which Phillips gave the name Taxites laxus is in all prohahility specifically identical with Cycadites zamioides,nbsp;Lock. The spiral disposition of the leaves, as well as the small

size and habit of the shoots, clearly demonstrate that Leckenhy�s plant is a Conifer and not a Cycad. On the type-specimen ofnbsp;Ot/cadites zamioides (Geological Museum, Cambridge) Nathorst hasnbsp;�written �a Conifer of the genus Paltmja.quot; Another specimen innbsp;the Lcckcnhy Collection is lahollcd in Bean�s hand-writing Zamianbsp;angmUfolia.

The few fragments of this species that arc known are too small to enable us to make any suggestions as to relationship withnbsp;recent types. It is probable that Taxites zamioides is spccificallynbsp;identioal with some of the Coniferous branches described bynbsp;Fontaine from the Potomac beds under the generic namenbsp;Ceplialotaxopsis ; a term applied to twigs with distichous leavesnbsp;having the habit of species of such recent genera as Ccplialotaxiis,nbsp;Torreya, and Taxus?

A slender axis hearing crowded, spirally disposed leaves, which have assumed a distichous arrangement. The individual leavesnbsp;show a fairly clear midrib ; they arc sliarply pointed distally, andnbsp;decrease rapidly in breadth at the base ; from 2-3 cm. in length.

39,202. A fragment with fewer and more scattered leaves. Cf. Phillips� tig. 24, pi. vii.

CONCLUSION.

Tn^ the present volume we have practically confined our attention to the fossil plants from the Inferior Oolite (Bathonian) strata ofnbsp;the Yorkshire coast. A comparison of the Yorkshire flora withnbsp;those of the Stonesfield Slate and other .Turassio horizons willnbsp;he more appropriately undertaken after the completion of thenbsp;systematic treatment of the species in a succeeding volume. Thenbsp;flora with which we are now concerned is the richest amongnbsp;Mesozoic floras from British localities both as regards the numbernbsp;of species and the abundance of material, and is scarcely surpassednbsp;by any assemblage of fossil plants from extra-British regions.

A general survey of a geological flora should include the consideration of such points as the following: (i.) The geographical distribution of the several types composing the flora; (ii.) a comparison with older and younger floras, and with recent species;nbsp;(iii.) the conditions under which the plants grow; and (iv.) thenbsp;recognition of the most characteristic species which may serve asnbsp;the best indices of geological age.

In attempting to determine the geographical range of the several elements of the Yorkshire Coast flora, we have to face seriousnbsp;difficulties. It is often impossible to decide whether an Englishnbsp;species is identical with or merely closely allied to a speciesnbsp;recorded from another region. If we ignore all records but thosenbsp;which can be interpreted with satisfactory accuracy, without anynbsp;doubt as to the specific position of the plants, our comparisonsnbsp;would be restricted within limits which would not enable us tonbsp;do full justice to the available data. In the comparison of florasnbsp;more or less widely separated geographically, the recognition ofnbsp;specific identity is naturally desirable, but the object of a comparative study of fossil floras is primarily to determine resemblancesnbsp;and differences as regards the general facies of the vegetation rathernbsp;than the absolute specific identity of individual plants. In thenbsp;following table I have indicated the geographical range of thenbsp;English species, without giving any indication as to the degree of

-confidence with which each determination has hcen made. Many of the extra-British types arc undoubtedly specifically identicalnbsp;with Yorkshire species, hut in other cases the foreign species maynbsp;possibly be identical with those from the Yorkshire coast, or theynbsp;may represent specifically distinct but closely allied types.

It should be borne in mind, therefore, that the accompanying table is not intended to convey the idea that all the references tonbsp;the occurrence of Yorkshire plants in foreign localities necessarilynbsp;imply specific identity; each record denotes the occurrence of eithernbsp;the same species or a closely allied or representative species. Innbsp;the lists of plants given in the Introductory section and in thenbsp;comparisons instituted in the systematic treatment of each species,nbsp;I have attempted to show how far I regard English species identicalnbsp;with or closely allied to extra-British types.

In addition to the geographical regions given in the table, it is worthy of note that some Ehsetic species from South Americannbsp;localities' are very similar to English types; from Madagascarnbsp;also Zciller � has recently recorded the occurrence of a few species�nbsp;e.g. Klultia {Pecopteris) exilis�identical with or nearly related tonbsp;Inferior Oolite types.

I propose to consider more fully the stratigraphioal correlation of Mesozoic floras in a subsequent volume, but there are somenbsp;points of geological and botanical interest which should be noticednbsp;in reference to the flora with which we are at present concerned.nbsp;The comparison of the English plants with the Upper Gondwananbsp;flora of India and with Australian floras of corresponding geologicalnbsp;position, has confirmed me in my opinion that the differencesnbsp;between the Mesozoic vegetation of the Northern and Southernnbsp;Hemispheres have been exaggerated. Geographical separation ofnbsp;fossil species frequently leads to an unnecessary amount of specificnbsp;distinction in the naming and determination of plants. We naturallynbsp;hesitate to admit specific identity between plants from such widelynbsp;separated regions as England on the one hand, and India, Southnbsp;Africa, and Australia on the other; but the too frequent use ofnbsp;�distinct generic and specific designations has obscured the botanicalnbsp;resemblances of the Yorthorn and Southern floras. The number

of Indian and Australian fossils recorded in the ahovo table, some being no .doubt identical and others specifically distinct butnbsp;closely allied species, illustrates a marked similarity between thenbsp;vegetation of the ancient Gondwana Land and the Europeannbsp;continent. In Jurassic times there was no doubt a much greaternbsp;uniformity in the vegetation of the world than exists at the presentnbsp;day. A closer analysis of the Gondwana floras and a more detailednbsp;comparison with those of the Northern Hemisphere may enable usnbsp;to recognize well-defined distinguishing features suggestive ofnbsp;botanical provinces such as existed in the Lower Gondwananbsp;period,�^but this is a matter for subsequent treatment.

The resemblance between the Wealden flora, described in two previous British Museum Catalogues,' and the Jurassic flora ofnbsp;East Yorkshire, has been already noticed. In a few instancesnbsp;we find what appear to be identical species common to thenbsp;two periods, e.g., Matonidium Qoepperti, Rujfordia Goepperti, andnbsp;Ginkgo digitata. In addition to the occurrence of the samenbsp;species, we recognize several plant-types in the two floras whichnbsp;demonstrate the marked similarity between the quot;Wealden andnbsp;Inferior Oolite floras. Comparing the two floras, we notice asnbsp;common characteristics the absence of Angiosperms and annbsp;abundance of Cycads and Ferns: the Conifers probably playednbsp;a somewhat more prominent role in the Wealden than in the oldernbsp;Jurassic vegetation.

of the English Wealden and Jurassic vegetation as regards the relative prominence of the different classes of plants; the figuresnbsp;are convenient as a means of comparison, but they must not be

Tegardcd as giving more than an approximate estimate of the composition of each flora. It is probable that the vegetationnbsp;which has left fairly abundant traces in the quot;Wealden sedimentsnbsp;of the South-East of England and in the Inferior Oolite beds ofnbsp;Yorkshire, flourished under very similar climatal and physicalnbsp;conditions.

A comparison of the Inferior Oolite plants with those of Ehrntic age from Germany, Scania, and other regions leads ns to recognizenbsp;a few examples of what appear to be identical species, o.g., Podo-zamites lanceolatiis and Splienopteris princeps. Several instances ofnbsp;� closely related types have also been pointed out in the introductorynbsp;and systematic sections of this volume.

We may next briefly consider some of the more conspicuous members of the Inferior Oolite flora from the point of view ofnbsp;their resemblance to other fossil typos as well as to recent plants.

EauisETALES.�Eqiiisetites columnaris is one of the commonest and most characteristic plants in the Yorkshire flora. Its abundancenbsp;lends support to the view that the small seams of coal met withnbsp;in the strata of the Estuarine Series were probably in great measure,nbsp;if not entirely, formed from the remains of the Equisetaceousnbsp;plants which gi-ew in the Jurassic swamps. The thicker stemsnbsp;described under the name Equisetites Beani are comparable in sizenbsp;to E. arenaceus of Triassic age, and surpass in diameter thenbsp;characteristic Ehsetic form E. Muensteri. Compared with suchnbsp;Wealden species as Equisetites Lyelli and E. Bur char dti the Inferiornbsp;Oolite Equisetacese are distinguished by the greater thickness ofnbsp;their stems, and in this respect they carry us a stage further fromnbsp;the modern Horsetails towards the arborescent representatives ofnbsp;the Equisetalcs, which flourished during the Triassic and Pateozoienbsp;epochs.

Filices.�Among the Inferior Oolite ferns there are several species which cannot be referred to any particular subdivision ofnbsp;the filices, but on the other hand we have sufficient evidence innbsp;many cases to admit of a satisfactory identification of familynbsp;affinities. The species Sagenopteria Phillipsi, which for reasonsnbsp;already stated I have included among the filices rather than thenbsp;Ehizocarpeae, may not improbably belong to the Polypodiacese,nbsp;but of this we have not sufficient evidence. The species is ofnbsp;interest as a common type, which forms a connecting link onnbsp;the one hand with the older and larger Ehajtic forms Sagenopteria

rlioifolia and S. Goeppertiana and on tlie other with the smaller Wcalden type 8. Mantelli.

In the case of the abundant and handsome fern Claiophlchisf denticwlata we lack convincing evidence of family relationship, butnbsp;such indications of soral characters as occur point to a polypodiaceous-affinity. The bipinnatc form of frond of this species is practicallynbsp;identical with that of certain Ehaetic ferns, e.g. Cladophlebinnbsp;Roesserti, and with ferns of Wealdon ago, e.g. C. AlherUi. Fernsnbsp;of the Cladophlebis denticiilata type are very abundant in Mesozoicnbsp;strata, hut in most cases we arc unable to determine their systematicnbsp;position; this form of frond is in itself of little or no use as annbsp;aid to the recognition of botanical relationship.

As laathorst has stated, it is not improbable that some of the Sphcnoptcroid fronds from the Inferior Oolite rocks may be bestnbsp;compared with species of the recent Polypodiaceous genus Bavallia.

Passing from these rather doubtful examples of Jurassic Polj-podiacea), wo may turn to other more satisfactory fern species.nbsp;It is clear that the Matoninese played a prominent part in the-vegetation of the Oolitic period; Matonidiun Goepperti and thenbsp;two species of Laccopteris, L. polypodioides and L. Woodwardi, arc-fairly abundantly represented by well-preserved fertile specimens.nbsp;This interesting family, with two surviving species in the Malayannbsp;region, occupied an oven more prominent position in the Ehffitic-than in the Jurassic period. From Ehmtic times, when the familynbsp;appears to have reached its maximum development, the Matoninemnbsp;gradually decrease in importance, and at the present day the genusnbsp;Matonia alone remains as a survival from Mesozoic times.

Dipteridinm.�This family, treated as a subdivision distinct from, the PolypodiaccDD for reasons already discussed,' appears to havenbsp;a geological history similar to that of the Matoninese. Bictyo-phyllum rugosim, one of the more abundant of Inferior Oolite types,nbsp;is practically indistinguishable from B. M�lssom, B. aciitilohum, and.nbsp;other Ehffitic species. The genera Camptopteris and Clathropterisnbsp;afford other Ehmtic examples of the same family, and in thenbsp;Wealden flora we have the genus Protorhipis, which approachesnbsp;most closely to the surviving fern Bipteris, another tropicalnbsp;remnant of a Mesozoic family.

Osmundacea. � Todites W�liammni must have boen one of the most conspicuous and abundant ferns 'which flourished during thenbsp;Jurassic period. It is possible that Spliempteris prineeps shouldnbsp;also be included in this family, but we lack such convincingnbsp;�evidence of affinity as is afforded by the fertile specimens ofnbsp;Todites Willtamsoni. The Eheetic species described by Schenk asnbsp;Acroshcliites Goeppertianus appears to be barely distinguishablenbsp;from the Inferior Oolite species of Todites-. from the Wealdennbsp;plant-beds no satisfactory representative of the Osmundacose has sonbsp;far been recorded.

The Cyaiheacem are represented by such species as Coniopteris hymenophylloides, one of the most characteristic of the Yorkshirenbsp;Coast ferns, C. quinq^ueloha, and C. arguta. There is a strikingnbsp;resemblance between some of these fossil Cyatheaceaj and the isolatednbsp;recent fern Thyrsopteris elegans. The Inferior Oolite flora wasnbsp;characterized by an abundance of ferns of the Thyrsopteris typo.

Among 'Wealden fems we have the genus .Protopteris, which may probably be included as a member of the Cyatheacese, a typenbsp;which extends into still more recent geological periods.

Sclmeeacem.�In addition to the somewhat doubtful Ruffordia Goepperti of Wealden and Inferior Oolite age, we have an excellentnbsp;example of this family in the widely distributed ITlukia exilis,nbsp;a species which may also be closely matched among Wealden ferns,nbsp;neither the Cyatheacese nor the Schizseacoae are represented bynbsp;any well-authenticated Ilhsetic species, but in the Palaeozoic genusnbsp;Senffenhrgia we have a still older type which exhibits well-markednbsp;Schizmaceous characters. Klukia exilis agrees precisely as regardsnbsp;the structure of the sporangia with the living members of thenbsp;family, but in the form of the frond it differs from the modernnbsp;representatives of the Schizeeacese.

The Yorkshire Coast Flora has not so far yielded any recognizable �examples of the Glciohcniaoeoe or the Marattiacese; species of thenbsp;former family are known to have existed during the Wealdennbsp;period, and wo have a representative of the latter family in thenbsp;Rhmtic fern Tceniopteris Muensteri. From the Jurassic plant-bedsnbsp;�of Poland, Eacihorski has described a member of the Marattiacejenbsp;under the name Banma. Neither the Hymenophyllacese nor thenbsp;Cphioglossacese appear to have any representatives among thenbsp;Inferior Oolite plants. The statement that certain families of fernsnbsp;are not represented, simply means that we have not discovered any

fossils among the Yorkshire plants which afford sufRoiently good evidence to warrant their inclusion in these families; it is possible-that Tmiiopteris vittata, which is one of the commonest species,nbsp;may belong to the Marattiacem, and it may be that some of thenbsp;8phenopteroid fronds possessed Hymenophyllacoous soral characters.

It is among the ferns of the Southern Hemisphere that we find the closest resemblances to the Inferior Oolite species. The Malayannbsp;species Matonia pectinata is essentially a Jurassic and Lowernbsp;Cretaceous type ; the Indian and Malayan Dipteris recalls Biotyo-pliyllum rugosum. Tliyrsopteris elegans of Juan Fernandez, Bichsonianbsp;arlorescens of St. Helena, Balantium culcita of Madeira and thenbsp;Azores may be cited as Cyatheaceous types most nearly allied to-those of Jurassic age. Todea harlara, a native of New Zealandnbsp;and tropical Australia, is the nearest living representative ofnbsp;Toditeg Williamsoni. The Schizmaceffi are to-day widely distributednbsp;in both hemispheres, but several members of the family are-characteristic of Southern latitudes.

Ginkgoales.�The two genera Ginlcgo and liaiera, although both appear to have been in existence in the Triassic and even Permiannbsp;periods, are essentially characteristic of Ehcetic and Jurassic floras.nbsp;The Inferior Oolite species of Baicra are very similar to llheeticnbsp;fonns, while Omhgo digitata is for the most part a Jurassic andnbsp;Cretaceous typo of wide geographical range. The trees, whichnbsp;boro the Ginlcgo and Baicra foliage, and flowers, which werenbsp;probably rather more Cycadean in structure than those of thenbsp;recent Maidenhair-tree, must have formed a striking feature innbsp;the Jurassic vegetation. The extreme northern range of Baicranbsp;and Ginlcgo points to a vigorous development of the Ginkgoalesnbsp;during the latter part of the Mesozoic era.

Cycad.ales.�At no period in the earth�s history were the Cycadacem more abundantly represented than in Jurassic times.nbsp;WiUiamsonia, Nilssonia, and Otozam�e� are the most conspicuousnbsp;examples of the Cj^cadales in the Yorkshire flora; TFiUiamsonianbsp;gig as may be compared with the English Wealden type W.nbsp;Carrutliersi; WiUiamsonia peeten is one of the most abundant andnbsp;at the same time one of the most characteristic of the Inferiornbsp;Oolite species. The Bennottitem appear to have attained theirnbsp;maximum development in the Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceousnbsp;periods; the two species WiUiamsonia gigas and W. peeten arenbsp;tj�pical Jurassic types, and Anomozamites Nilssoni recalls the llhsetie

species A. minor. The species of Otozam�es, which played a very prominent part in the composition of the Inferior Oolite flora,nbsp;afford points of contact with both Rhsetic and AVealden types,nbsp;but this genus is primarily characteristic of Jurassic floras. I havenbsp;already pointed out that some of the Jurassic Cycadean frondsnbsp;exhibit a closer approach to the fronds of ferns than is the casenbsp;with modern Cj'cads, with the exception of Stangcria paradoxa}

Nihsonia compta is one of the commonest species in the Yorkshire Coast flora, but its close resemblance to JV. polgmorpha and othernbsp;Rheetic types detracts from its value as an index of geologicalnbsp;age. In the quot;VYealden flora the genus Nihsonia is represented bynbsp;a smaller-leaved form, N. Schaumburgensis. Ho example of thenbsp;genus Cycadites has so far been recognized among the Eastnbsp;Yorkshire plants.

Ctenis falcata is a characteristic species in the Inferior Oolite flora; the larger form, described as Ctenis sp., recalls some of thenbsp;species described by Raciborski from Poland as well as certainnbsp;Rhsetic examples from Scania and elsewhere.

Podozaniites lanceolatus is a Mesozoic type of wide geographical range occurring chiefly in Rhsetic and Jurassic strata, and lessnbsp;abundant in more recent beds; it is not improbable that this speciesnbsp;may be best compared with the conifer Agatliis australis rathernbsp;than with Cycads.

CoNiFERiE.�The Conifers are much less abundant than cither the Ferns or Cycads; it is impossible to determine how far thisnbsp;may be taken as an indication that they played but an insignificantnbsp;part in the vegetation, or as resulting from the less favourablenbsp;position of the Conifers�which probably occupied higher groundnbsp;farther from the area of sedimentation�as regards the chancesnbsp;of fossilization. In all probability the Coniforae were lessnbsp;numerous and represented by fewer types than either the Cycadsnbsp;or Ferns. So far as we are able to form an opinion as to thenbsp;systematic position of the Inferior Oolite Conifers, it wouldnbsp;seem that their affinities are chiefly with the Araucarinae.nbsp;Nageiopsis anglica represents a typo which is much more abundantnbsp;in Horth American beds of Wealdon or Upper Jurassic age than innbsp;European regions ; it may be compared with Araucaria Bidwillinbsp;or with certain species of Podocarpus. Arauoarites PhUlipsi is

certainly an Araucarian type; Pagiophyllmi Williamsoni recalls Araucaria exceha, and Cryptomerites divaricatus bears a closenbsp;resemblance to Araucaria Cunninghamii. The vegetative charactersnbsp;of Brachypliyllum mamillare invite a comparison with the Tasmaniannbsp;genus Arthrotaxis.

Admitting the danger of drawing conclusions from such imperfect data as the Conifers afford, we are probably justified in assertingnbsp;that Araucaria, Arthrotaxis, and possibly Podocarpus and Agathis,nbsp;among existing genera agree the most nearly with Inferior Oolitenbsp;types. The Abietineee have no certain representives in the Eastnbsp;Yorkshire flora; this family assumed a much more importantnbsp;position in the succeeding Wealden and Lower Cretaceousnbsp;vegetation.

In conclusion, we may endeavour to answer the question, what assemblage of recent plants would we select as best illustratingnbsp;the character of the Inferior Oolite vegetation ? The largenbsp;Equisetums of the marshes of South America most nearly recallnbsp;the fossil forms, while a species of Selaginella, a genus of widenbsp;distribution, and represented by several tropical examples in thenbsp;Southern Hemisphere, may be taken as affording the nearest approachnbsp;to lycopodites falcatus. Among Ferns we have Matonia pectinata,nbsp;Dipteris conjugata, Todea harhara, species of Lygodium and Anemia,nbsp;Balantium {Dichsonia), and Thyrsopteris. Among recent Cycads,nbsp;the fronds of certain species of Zamia, Pncephalartos, Bowenia, andnbsp;others recall the habit of some of the Jurassic types. Ginkgo bilobanbsp;alone survives as a representative of the Ginkgoales, and is probablynbsp;but slightly different from its Jurassic ancestors. Of existingnbsp;Conifers we may select Araucaria, Arthrotaxis, and Podocarpus asnbsp;types exhibiting the nearest approach to the Inferior Oolite species.nbsp;It is in the Southern tropics that we must look for existing formsnbsp;which afford the most striking links between the vegetation ofnbsp;to-day and that which has left imperfect records in the Jurassicnbsp;sediments of the Yorkshire coast. The climate was iwesumablynbsp;more tropical than that of North Europe at the present day ;nbsp;there is no evidence that the plants of Jurassic times grew undernbsp;conditions which induced xerophytic characters, moisture beingnbsp;probably abundant and favourable to the luxuriant growth ofnbsp;Equisetums and Ferns.

LIST OF WORKS QUOTED.

J^aker, J. O. (87). The Handbook of the Fern Allies. London, 1887. Baker, J. G. (88). On a further Collection of Ferns from West Borneo.

Bartholin, C. T. (92). Nogle i den bornholmske Juraformation forekommende Plante forsteninger. Bot. Tid. Bot. For.nbsp;Kjovenliavn, vol. xviii. Heft 1, p. 12, 1892.

Blanford, H. F. (75). On the Age and Correlation of the Plantbearing Series of India, and the former existence of an Indo-Ooeanic Continent. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxxi.nbsp;p. 519.

Bolton, H. (92). A Catalogue of the Types and Figured Sjoecimens contained in the Geological Department of the Manchesternbsp;Museum, Owens College. Mtts. Assoc., Report of Proceedings,nbsp;1892.

Bower, F. 0. (.99). Studies in the Morphology of Spore-producing Members. IV. The Leptosporangiate Ferns. Phil. Tracis.nbsp;B, vol. ccxii. p. 29.

Brongniart, A. (25). Observations sur les v�g�taux fossiles renfermes dans les Gres de Hoer en Soani�e. Ann. Sci. nat. vol. iv.

Brongniart, A. (28^). Prodrome d�une histoire des v�g�taux fossiles. Paris, 1828.

Brongniart, A. (28*). Histoire des v�g�taux fossiles. Paris, 1828. Brongniart, A. (49). Tableau des genres de v�g�taux fossiles. (Extraitnbsp;du Dictionnaire d�histoire naturelle, vol. xiii.) Paris, 1849.

Brongniart, A. (74). Note sur les plantes fossiles de Tinkiako envoy�es en 1873 par M. l�Abb� David. Bull. Soc. g�ol. France,nbsp;vol. ii. [3], p. 408.

Brongniart, A. (81). Recherches sur les graines fossiles silicifi�es. Paris, 1881.

Bunhury, O. J. F. (47). Descriptions of Fossil Plants from the Coalfield' of Virginia, near Richmond in Virginia. Q^art. Journ,nbsp;Geol. Soc. vol. iii. p. 281.

Bunhcry, 0. J. F. (51). On some Fossil Plants from the Jurassic Strata of the Yorkshire Coast. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. vii.,nbsp;p. 179.

Carmthers, W. (66). On some Fossil Coniferous Fruits. Geol. Mag. vol. iii. [1], p. 534.

Carmthers, TF. (67). On some Cycadean Fruits from the Secondary Rooks of Britain. Geol. Mag. vol. iv. [1], p. 101.

Carmthers, IF. (69^). On some Undescribed Coniferous Fruits fromi the Secondary Rocks of Britain. Geol. Mag. vol. vi. [1],

Carmthers, IF. (69-). On Beania, a new genus of Cycadean Fruit,, from the Yorkshire Oolite. Geol. Mag. vol. vi. [1], p. 97.

Carmthers, IF. (70). On Fossil Cycadean Stems from the Secondary Rocks of Britain. Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxvi. p. 675.

Carruthers, TF. (72). Notes on Fossil Plants from Queensland, Australia.. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxviii. p. 1.

Carmthers, TF. (77). Description of a New Species of Araucarites from' the Coralline Oolite of Malton. Appendix to a paper bynbsp;Blake amp; Hudleston, � On the Corallian Rooks of England.�nbsp;Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxxiii. p. 402.

Celakovsky, L. (90). Die Gymnospermen. Abh. h. hohm. Ges. Wiss. vol. iv. [7], p. 1.

Clark, J. IF. and Hughes, T. McKenny (90). The Life and Letters of the Reverend Adam Sedgwick. Cambridge, 1890.

Cri�, L. (86). Sur les Aflinit�s des flores oolithiques de la France occidentale et de l�Angleterre. Compt. rend. vol. ciii.nbsp;p. 528.

Cri�, L. (87). Sur les Affinit�s des flores oolithiques de la France occidentale et du Portugal. Compt. rend. vol. cv. p. 1189.

CVi�, L. (88). Sur les Affinitds des flores jurassiques et triassiques de 1�Australi� et de la Nouvelle-Z�lande. Gompt. rend. vol. cvii.nbsp;p. 1014.

Dawson, J. W. (85). On the Mesozoic Floras of the Rocky Mountain Region of Canada. Trans. R. Soc. Canada, sect. iv. 1885.

Dawson, J. W. (92). On the Correlation of Early Cretaceous Floras in Canada and the United States, and on some New Plantsnbsp;of this period. Trans. R. Soc. Canada, sect. iv. 1892.

Desnoyers, J. (24). Observations sur quelques Syst�mes de la Formation oolithique du uord-ouest de la France. Ann.nbsp;Soi. nat. vol. iv. [1], p. 353.

Dunker, W. (43). Ueber der norddeutsohen sogenannten Wiilderthon mid dessen Versteinerungen.

Dunker, ^Y. (46). Monographie der norddeutschen Wealdenbildung. Braunschweig, 1846.

Dupont, E. (78). Sur la decouverte d�ossements d�lguanodon, de poissons et de v�g�taux dans la fosse Sainte-Barbe dunbsp;Charbonnage de Bernissart. Bull. Ac. B. Belg. vol. xlvi. [2],nbsp;p. 387.

Engler, A. and Prantl, K. (97). Die natiirlichen Pflanzenfamilien.. Nachtrag zu Teile ii.-iv. p. 19.

Etheridge, R. (82). Presidential Address. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxxviii., Proc. p. 46.

Etheridge, R., Jun. (88). Additions to the Fossil Flora of Eastern Australia. Proc. Linn. Soc. E.S. Wales, vol. iii. [2], p. 1300.

Ettingshausen, 0. von (52). Begriindung einiger neuen oder nicht genau bekannten Arten der Lias- uiid der Oolithflora. Ahh.nbsp;k.-k. geol. Reichs. vol. i. Abth. 3.

Feistmantel, 0. (77'). Ibid. vol. i. pt. 2 : Jurassic (Liassic) Flora of the Rajmahal Group in the Rajmalial Hills.

Feistmantel, 0. (77quot;). Ibid. vol. i. pt. 3 ; Jurassic (Liassic) Flora of the Rajmahal Group from Golajuli (near Ellore), S. Godaverinbsp;District.

JPeistmantcl, O. (77^). Ibid. vol. ii. pt. 2 : Flora of the Jabalpur Group (Upper Gondwanas) iii the Somierbada Region.

F�eistmantel, O. (79-). Ibid. vol. iii. pt. 1 ; The Flora of the Talchir-Karharbari Bed.s.

JFeistmantel, O. (80). Ibid. vol. iii. pt. 2 : The Flora of the Damuda-Panchet Divisions.

JFeistmantel, 0. (81'). Ibid. vol. iii. pt. 1 ; The Flora of the Talchir-Karharbari Beds. (Supplement.)

.Feistmanfel, 0. (81-). Ibid. vol. iii. pt. 3 ; The Flora of the Damuda-Panchet Divisions.

Feistmanfel, O. (90). Geological and Palteontological Relations of the Goal and Plant-bearing Beds of Palseozoio and Mesozoicnbsp;Age in Eastern Au.stralia and Tasmania. Jfem. Geol. Surv.nbsp;JV.S. Wales; Palaeontology,'^o. 3.

Felix, J. (82). Beitriige zur Kenntuiss fossiler Coniferen H�lzer. Engl. Jahrh. vol. iii. p. 260.

Fliche and Bleicher (82). �tude sur la flore de I�Oolithe inf�rieure aux Environs de Nancy. Bull. Soc. Sci. Nancy.

.Fontaine, W. M. (83). Contributions to the Knowledge of the Older Mesozoic Flora of Virginia. F.S. Geol. Surv. Mon. vol. vii.

Fontaine, W. M. (89). The Potomac or Younger Mesozoic Flora. IJ.S. Geol. Surv. Mon. vol. xv. Washington, 1889.

Fontaine, IF. M. (96). Notes on some Mesozoic Plants from near Oroville, California. Amer. Journ. Sci. vol. iv. [4], p. 273.

Fontaine, IF. M. and White, I. C. (80). The Permian or Upper Carboniferous Flora of West Virginia and South-Westnbsp;Pennsylvania. Second Geol. Surv. Penns., 1880.

Fox-Strangways, C. and Barrow, G. (82). The Geology of the Country between Whitby and Scarborough. Mem. Geol. Surv.,nbsp;Quarter Sheet 95 N.W.

Fox-Strangways, C. and Barrow, G. (92'). The Jurassic Rocks of Britain. Vol. i. Yorkshire. Mem. Geol. Surv.

Fujii, K. (96). On the different views hitherto pi'oposed regarding the Morphology of the Flowers of Ginkgo biloha, L. Bot. Mag.nbsp;Tokyo, vol. X. p. 7.

'Gardner, J. S. (83). A Monograph of the British Eocene Flora. Pakeont. Soc. 1883-86.

�Gardner, J. S. (86). On Mesozoic Angiosperms. Geol. 2Iag. vol. iii. [3], p. 193.

argentinisohen Provinzen La Rioja, San Juan, nnd Mendoza.. Falwontographica, Suppl. iii. 1879.

Giippert, H. It (36). Die fossilen Farrnkrauter, JVova Acta Ac. Cws. Leop.-Car. vol. xvii. Suppl.

Guppert, H. R. (41). Die Gattungen der fossilen Pflanzen. Bonn, 1841.. Goppert, H. R. (50). Monographie der fossilen Coniferen. Nat..

Verhand. Holland. Maatsehaf. Haarlem. Leiden, 1850. Grant, C. TP. (40). Vide Morris, J.

Gregory, J. W. (96). Catalogue of the Fossil Bryozoa in the Department of Geology, British Museum (Natural History). The Jurassic Bryozoa. London, 1896.

Vol. i. pt. 2; Anhang Uber versteinerte Hcilzer der arctisohen Zone (C. Cramer).

Heer, 0. (75). Ibid. vol. iii. igt;t. 2 ; Die Kreide-Flora der arctischeir Zone.

Heer, 0. (78). Ibid. vol. v. pt. 2 : Beitriige zur fossilen Flora Sibiriens.. und des Amurlandes.

Beer, 0. (81�). OontributioiLS k la flore fossile du Portugal, Secc. Trab. Geol. Portugal.

Heer, 0. (81^). Zur Geschichte der Ginkgo-artigen Biiume. EngleAs Bot. Jahrb. vol. i.

Hirase, S. (97). Untersuchungen Uber das Verhalten des Pollens voU' Ginkgo biloha. Bot. Cent. vol. xlix. p. 33.

Hirase, S. (98). �tudes sur la fccondation et I�embryogenie du Ginkgo-biloha. Journ. Coll. Sci. Japan, vol. xii. p. 103.

Hosiiis and Von der March (79)- Die Flora der Westfalischer Kreide-formation. Palceontographica, vol. xxvi. p. 127.

TIudlesto7i, W. H. (74). The Yorkshire Oolites. Pt. 1. Qeol. Assoc. Proc. vol. iii. p. 283.

Ikeno, S. (98). Zur Kenntniss des sog. ceiitrosomahnlichen Korpers im Pollen-Schlauch der Cycadeen. Mora, vol. Ixxxv. p. 15.

Jack, R. L. and Etheridge, R., Jwi. (92). The Geology and Paleontology of Queensland and New Guinea. Brisbane, 1892.

Jeffrey, E. C. (99). The Development, Structure, and Affinities of the genus Equisetum. Mem. Boston Soo. Nat. Hist. vol. v.nbsp;No. 5, p. 155.

.lohnston, R. M. (87). General Observations regarding the Classification of the Upper Paleozoic and Mesozoic Bocks of Tasmania.

. Judd, J. IF (73). The Secondary Bocks of Scotland. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxix. p. 97.

Judd, J. IF. (98). The Earliest Engraved Geological Map of England and Wales. Oeol. Mag. vol. v. [4], p. 97.

Kayser, E. (95). Text-book of Comparative Geology. Translated and edited by P. Lake. London, 1895.

Kidston, R. (85). On the occurrence of Lycopodites {Sigillaria) Vanuxemi, G�ppert, in Britain ; with remarks on itsnbsp;affinities. Journ. Linn. Soc. vol. xxi. p. 560.

Krasser, F. (91). �ber die fossile Flora der rhatischen Schichten Persiens. Sitzb. k. Akad. IFiks. ^Yien. vol. c. Abth. 1.

Krasser, F. (95). Kreidepflanzen von Lesina. Jahrh. k.-k. geol. Reichs. vol. xlv. p. 37.

Kurr, J. O. (45). Beitriige zur fossilen Flora der Juraformation WUrttembergs. Stuttgart, 1845.

Lebour, O. A. (77). Illustrations of Fossil Plants, being an autotype reproduction of selected drawings prepared under thenbsp;supervision of the late Dr. Lindley and Mr. W. Hutton.nbsp;London, 1877.

Lebour, O. A. (78). Catalogue of the Hutton Collection of Fossil Plants. Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1878.

Leckenby, J. (64). On the Sandstones and Shales of the Oolites of Scarborough, with descriptions of some New Species ofnbsp;Fossil Plants. Quart. Journ. Oeol. Soc. vol. xx. p. 74.

Lignier, 0. (95). V�g�taux fossiles de Normandie. Me'm. Soc. Linn. Normandie, vol. xxviii. p. 5.

Lindley, J. and HvMon^ W. (31-37). The Fossil Flora of Great Britain. Ziiik, H. F. (42). leones selectae Anatomioo-Botanicee. Hefte i-iv.nbsp;Berlin, 1839-42.

McCoy, F. (47). On the Fossil Botany and Zoology of the Books associated with the Coal of Australia. Ann. lt;�� Mag. Nat.nbsp;Hist. vol. XX. p. 145.

{Supplement.) Amer. Journ. Sci. vol. vi. [4], p. 105. Mecllicott, H. B. and Blanford, IF. T. (93). Manual of the Geologynbsp;of India. 2nd ed. Calcutta, 1893.

Miller, H. (57). The Testimony of the Bocks. Edinburgh, 1857. Miquel, F. A. IF. (61). Prodromus systematis Cycadearum.

M�nster, G. Graf zu (43). Beitriige zur Petrefactenkunde Bayreuth. {Braun, J.) Heft vi. Bayreuth.

Murchison, B. I. (29). On the Coal-field of Brora in Sutherlandshire and some of the Stratified Deposits in the North of Scotland.nbsp;Trans. Geol. Soc. vol. ii. [2], p. 293.

Nansen, F. (97). Farthest North. Vol. ii. Westminster, 1897. Nathorst, A. G. (75). Cm en cycadokotte fran den ratiska formationensnbsp;lager vid Tinkarp i Skane. Of vers. k. Veten. Akad. F�rhand.nbsp;No. 10.

Nathorst, A. G. (78^). Beitriige zur fossilen flora Schwedens. Ueber einige rhiitische Pflanzen von Palajo in Schonen. Stuttgart,nbsp;1878.

Akademien, om en med underst�d af allmanna medal iitf�rd vetenskaplig resa till England.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'�fvers. h. Veten^

Nathorst, A. O. (86). Om Floran i Skanes Kolforande Bildningar.. Floran vid Bjuf.

Nathorst, A. Q. (88). Nya anmiirkningar om Williamsonia. Ofvers.. k. Vet. Akad. Fork. No. 6, p. 359.

Lief. 2 ; Zur Mesozoisohen Flora Spitzbergens. K. 8vensk.. Vet. Akad. Hand. vol. xxx.

iii. Fossil Plants from Franz Josef Land. London, 1900. Newberry, J. S. (67). Geological Kesearches in China, Mongolia, andnbsp;Japan. {Pumpelly, R.) Smithsonian Contributions tonbsp;Knoioledge, 202, vol. xv. p. 119.

Newberry, J. S. (86). Fossil Fishes and Fossil Plants of the Triassic Bocks of New Jersey and Connecticut Valley. U.S. Oeol..nbsp;Surv. Afon. xiv.

Neivberry, J. S. (95). The Flora of the Amboy Clays. Edited by A. Hollick. U.S. Oeol. Surv. Alon. xxvi.

Newton, E. T. and Teall, J. J. H. (97). Notes on a Collection of Bocks and Fossils from Franz Josef Land made by the Jackson-Harmsworth Expedition during 1894-96. Quart. Journ..nbsp;Oeol. Soo. vol. liii. p. 477.

Vol. i. pt. 1 : Fossil Flora of the Bajmahal Series in the-Bajmahal Hills. Alem. Oeol. Surv. India, ser. ii. Calcutta, 1880.

Phillips, J. (29). Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire. York, 1829. Phillips, J. (44). Memoirs of William Smith, LL.D. London, 1844.nbsp;Phillips, J. (75). Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire. Pt. i.

Platnauer, H. M. (91). List of Figured Specimens in the York Museum. Ann. Rep. Yorks. Phil. Soa. 1890. York, 1891.nbsp;Pomel, A. (49). Materiaux pour servir �, la Flore fossile des terrainsnbsp;jurassiques de la France. Amt. Bericht. Yersam. Ges.nbsp;deutsch. Naturforsch. und 'Arzte. Aachen, 1849.

Potoni�, H. (99). Lehrbnch der Pflanzenpalaeontologie. Berlin, 1899. Raciborski, M. (91). Ueber die Osmundaceen und Schizseaceen dernbsp;Juraformation. Engler�s Bot. Jahrh. vol. xiii. p. 1.nbsp;Raciborski, 31. (94). Flora Kopalna ogniotrwalych Glinek Krakowskich.

Reinecke, F. (97). Die Flora der Samoa-Inseln. Engler's Bot. Jahrb. vol. xxiii. p. 237.

Richards, J. T. (84). On Scottish Fossil Cycadaceous Leaves contained in the Hugh Miller Collection. Proc. B. Phys. Soa.nbsp;Edinburgh, 1884, p. 116.

Royle, J. F. (39). Illustrations of the Botany and other branches of the Natural History of the Himalayan Mountains andnbsp;of the Flora of Cashmere. Vol. i. 1839.

Sandherger, F. von (89). Bemerkungen liber die fossile Flora des Infralias Sandsteins von Burgpreppach bei Hassfurt. Sitz.nbsp;Wiirzb. phys. med. Oes. 1889.

Saporta, Be Ifarquis de (73). Pal�ontologie Frangaise. Sdr. ii. �' V�g�taux.�Plantes Jurassiques. Vol. i. : Algues, Equi-s�tac�es, Charac�es, Foug�res. Paris, 1873.

Saporta, Le Adarquis fi?e(91). Ibid. vol. iv. ; Types proangiospormiques, et Suppl�ment final.

Saporta, Le Marquis de (94). Flore fossile du Portugal. Direct, trav. g�ol. Portugal. Lisbon, 1894.

Schenk, A. (64). Beitriige zur Flora der Vorwelt. Palmontographica, vol. xi. p. 296.

Schenk, A. (66). �ber die Flora des Schwarzen Sohiefers von Raibl. Wiirzb. nat. Zeitsch. vol. vi. p. 10.

Schenk, A. (67). Die fossile Flora der Grenzscliichten der Keupers and Lias Frankens. Wiesbaden, 1867.

Schenk, A. (68). Beitrage zur Flora der Vorwelt. Palceontographica, vol. xvi. p. 219.

Schenk, A. (71). Die Flora der nordwestdeutschen Wealdenformation. Palceontographica, vol. xix. p. 203.

Schenk, A. (83). Pflanzliche Versteinerungen (Richthofen�s �China,� vol. iv.).

Schenk, A. (85). Die wahrend der Eeise des Grafen Bela Sz�chenyi in China gesammelten fossilen Pflanzen. Palceontographica,nbsp;vol. xxxi. p. 165.

Schenk, A. (88). Die fossilen Pflanzenreste. Breslau, 1888. SchenPs Handbuch, vol. iv.

Imp. St. P�tershourg, s�r. vii. vol. xxvii. No. 4, 1879. Schmalhausen, J. (81). Pflanzenpaliiontologische Beitrage. M�lang.

Seward, A. C. (94'). Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the Department of Geology, British Museum (Nat. Hist.). The Wealden Flora, pt. i.

Seward, A. C. (94*). Notes on the Bunbury Collection of Fossil Plants, with a list of type-specimens in the Cambridge Botanicalnbsp;Museum. Proc. Phil. Soc. Camb. vol. viii. pt. 3, p. 187.nbsp;Seward, A. C. (95). Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the Department of Geology, British Museum. The Wealden Flora, pt. ii.nbsp;Seward, A. 0, (97). On the Leaves of Bennettites. Proc. Phil. Soc.nbsp;Cambridge, vol. ix. p. 273.

Seward, A, C, (98). Fossil Plants for Students of Botany and Geology. Vol. i. Cambridge, 1898.

Seioard, A. C. (99). On the Structure and Affinities of Jhatonia pectitiata, E. Er., with notes on the Geological History ofnbsp;the Matonine�. Phil. Trans. B, vol. cxci. p. 171.

.Seward, A. C. (00). Notes on some Jurassic Plants in the Manchester Museum. Jfem. S Proc. Manchester Lit. amp; Phil. Soo.nbsp;vol xiv. pt. 3, p. 1.

Seioard, A. C. and Oowan, J. (00). The Maidenhair Tree {OinJcgo hiloha, L.). Annals Bot. vol. xiv. p. 109.

Sharpe, D. (50). On the Secondary District of Portugal which lies on the North of the Tagus. Qvmrt. Journ. Oeol. Soc. vol. vi.nbsp;p. 135.

Shirley, J. (98). Additions to the Possil Flora of Queensland. Dep. Mines; Geol. Surv. Bull. No. 7. Brisbane, 1898.

Smith, J. E. (1797). Characters of a new genus of plants named Salisburia. Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. iii. p. 330.

�Solms-Lanhach, Oraf zu (91). Fossil Botany. English translation; Oxford, 1891.

Solms-Laulach, Oraf zu and Steinmann, O. (99). Beitrage zur Geologie und Palaeontologie von Sudamerika. Neues Jahrh. Min.nbsp;Beilageband, xii. 1899, p. 593.

Staub, M. (96). Die fossilen Ctenis-Arten und Ctenis hungarica, n.sp. Foldt. Kozl. vol. xxvi.

Sternberg, C. Graf von (20-38). Versuoh einer geognostisoh-hotanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt. Leipzig.

Slur, D. (85). Die obertriadische Flora der Lunzer-Schichten und des bituminosen Schiefer von Eaibl. Sitzb, It. Akad. }Mss.nbsp;Wien. vol. xci. Abth. 1, p. 93.

Stur, D. (88'). Die Lunzer (Lettenkohlen) Flora in den � Older Mesozoic Beds of the Coal-field at Eastern Virginia.� Verh.nbsp;k.-h. geol. Reichs. No. 10, p. i.

Stur, D. (88'). Ueber die Flora der feuerfesten Thone von Grojec in Galizien. Verh. k.-k. geol. Reichs. No. 4, p. 106.

Szajnocha, L. (88). TJeber fossile Pflanzenreste aus Cacheuta in den Argentinischen Kepublik. Sitzb. k. Akad. Wiss. Wien.nbsp;vol. xcvii. Abth. 1, p. 219,

Tate, R. (67). On some Secondary Fossils from South Africa. Qum-f. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxiii. p. 139.

Tenison- Woods, J. E. On the Fossil Flora of the Coal Deposits of Australia. Proc. Linn. Soc. E.S. Wales, vol. viii. pt. 1, p. 37..

Thiselton-Dyer, W. T. (72^). On some Coniferous Eemains from the-Lithographic Stone of Solenhofen. Oeol. Hag. vol. ix. p. 150..

Topley, W. (88). Congres g�ologique international, Sess. LondreS)-1888. Explications des Excursions. London, 1888.

Tmutschold, T. (70). Der Klin�sche Sandstein. Moscou, 1870. Nouv. M�m. Soc. Wat. Moscou, vol. xiii. 1876, p. 191.

Unger, F. (52). Ueber einige fossile Pflanzen aus dem Lithographischen Schiefer von Solenhofen. Palceontographica, vol. ii. p, 249,.

Ward, L. F. (96). Some Analogies in the Lower Cretaceous of Europe and America. Ann. Rep. U.S. Oeol. Surv. 1896.

Ward, L. F. (97). Professor Fontaine and Dr. Newberry on the Age of the Potomac Formation. Science, March 12, p. 411.

Webber, H. J. (97). Notes on the Fecundation of Zamia and the Pollen-tube Apparatus of Ginkgo. Bot. Gazette, vol. xxiv. p. 225.

Wieland, G. R. (99'). A study of some American Fossil Cyoads. Pt. i, Amer. Journ. Sci. vol. vii. p. 219.

Williamson, W. C. (37). On the Distribution of Fossil Eemains on the Yorkshire Coast, from the Lower Lias to the Bath Oolitenbsp;inclusive. Geol. Tracis, vol. v. [2], p. 223.

Williamsmi, W. C. (70). Contributions towards the History of Zamia gigas, L. amp; H. Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxvi. p. 663.

Williamson, W. G. (83). On some Anomalous Oolitic and Palaeozoic Forms of Vegetation. R. Inst. Great Britain. (Weekly-evening meeting), Feb. 16, 1883.

Williamson, W. C. (85). On some undescribed tracks of Invertebrate Animals from the Yoredale Eocks, and on some inorganicnbsp;phenomena, produced on tidal shores, simulating Plant-remains. Mem. Manchester Lit. amp; Phil. Soc. vol. x. [3].

Williamson, IF. C. (.96). Eeminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist.. Ed. by Mrs. Crawford Williamson. London, 1896.

Williamson, W. G. and Scott, D. H. (94). Further Observations on the Organization of the Fossil Plants of the Coal-measures.nbsp;Pt. i.: Calamites, Calamostachys, and Sphenophyllnm. Phil.nbsp;Tram. B, vol. clxxxv. p. 863.

Woodward, H. B. (95). The Jurassic Bocks of Britain. The Middle and Upper Oolitic Bocks of England (Yorkshire excepted).nbsp;Mem. Oeol. Surv. London, 1895.

Yokohama, M. (89). Jurassic Plants from Kaga, Hida, and Echizen. Journ. Coll. Sci. Japan, vol. iii.

Yolcoyama, M. (94). Mesozoic Plants from K�zuke, Kii, Awa, and Toza. Ibid. vol. vii. pt. 3.

Young, O. and Bird, J. (22). A Geological Survey of the Yorkshire Coast. Whitby, 1822.

Zciller, R. (75). Note sur lea Plantes fossiles de la Teriiera (Chili). Bull. Soo. g�ol. France, vol. iii. [3], p. 572.

Zeiller, B. (85). Sur les Affinites du genre Laccopteris. Bull. Soc. hot. France, vol. xxxii. p, 22.

Zeiller, R. (88). Sur la presence, dans le gres bigarr� des Vosges, de VAcrostichides rhombifolius, Fontaine. Bull. Soc. g�ol.nbsp;France, vol. xvi. [3], p. 693.

Zeiller, R. (96). Bemarques sur la Flore fossile de 1�Altai, k propos des derni�res d�couvertes pal�obotaniques de MM. lesnbsp;Drs. Bodenbender et Kurtz dans le r�publique Argentine.nbsp;Bull. Soc. g�ol. France, vol. xxiv. [3], p. 466.

Zeiller, R. (97^). Bevue des Travaux de paleontologie v�g�tale publie�s dans le cours des ann�es 1893-96. Rev. O�n. Bot. vol. ix.nbsp;p. 324.

Zeiller, R. (97��). Observations sur quelques Foug�res des dep�ts houillers d�Asie mineure. Buil. Soc. bot. France, vol. xliv.nbsp;p. 195.

Zeiller, R. (00^). Sur les fossiles reoueillis par M. Villiaume dans les roches oharbonneuses des environs de Nossi-B�. Conipt.nbsp;rend. June 5, 1900.

Zigno, A. de (53). Sulle Cicad. foss. dell� Ooi. Riv. Acoad. Sci. Padova, 1853.

Zigno, A. de (53). D�couverte d�une flore jurassique analogue h celle de Scarborough dans les couches oolitiques des Alpesnbsp;V�nitiennes. Bidl. Soc. g�ol. France, vol. x. [2], p, 268.

Zigno, A. de (56-85). Flora fossilis formationis OolitliicEe. Vols. L and ii. Padova.

Vol. ii. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(73), pt.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;pp. 1-48, up to pi. xxxii. figs. 1 and 2.

� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(81), pt.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;2,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;pp. 49-80, up to pi. xxxiv. figs. 9 and 10.

� nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(81), pt.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;3,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;pp. 81-120, up to pi. xl. figs. 5 and 6.

Zigno, A. de (68). Descrizione di aloune Cicadeacee fossili rinvenute suir Oolite delle Alpi Venete. Att. latit. Venezie, xiii.nbsp;1867-68, p. 1213.

Zittel, K. A. (90). Handbuoli dor Palceontologie. Abth. ii. Schimper,, W. P. and Schenk, A. Munich and Leipzig, 1890.

Zitccarini, J. G. (40). Beitriige zur Morphologic der Coniferen. Ahh, Bey. Alcad. TFiss. vol. iii. p. 753.

INDEX.

\LPirABirrrc'Al ixdkx.

f“ .' ■• • ,. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;v.'ïf..i. ■- ••• ■gt;

..J nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;..

jf nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;»(nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'■*lt;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;gt;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;*S ^ H, *nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;• “ * *nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;ï

r -r V*-- ’ - nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;V :nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;-

' ' if V . , • h:^ - nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;’’■gt; 'V ■nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;’'Vnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;/ ' '* lt;

_ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;, *■ T -'nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;■'■ ?gt;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;•'*quot;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;;* • ‘l

.quot; nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;- gt;-!nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;, 'inbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.

■««^■■' nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;‘, 5;’-nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;i '' :.-quot;»

EXPLANATION OF PLATES.

With a few exceptions the figured specimens are preserved in the British Museum (Natural History), their registered numbersnbsp;being quoted in square brackets. Except where otherwise stated,nbsp;the figures are drawn natural size.

Eig. 3. Otozamites Beani (L. amp; H.). P. 210. Eig. 4. Otozamites Beani (L. amp; H.). P. 209.

Fig. 2. Otozamites obtusm (L. amp; H.), var. ooliticus. P. 221. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[14,010.]

B.M, JUBASSIC PLANTS.

Fig. 2. Nilssonia mediana (Leckenby, ex Bean MS.). P. 229. [39,290.] Fig. 3. Nilssonia mediana (Leckenby, ex Bean MS.). P. 229. [39,298.]nbsp;Fig. 4. Nilssonia mediana (Lamp;okamp;nhj, ex MS.). P.229. [V. 3668.]nbsp;Fig. 5. Nilssonia compta (Phillips). P. 226.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,292.]

PLATE VI.

Fig. 1. Oio�amte �CMTOiftaiMS (Lindley amp; Hutton). Page 216. [39,303.] Fig. 2. WilUamsonia gigas (L. amp; H.). P. 185.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[V. 2609a.]

Fig. 2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Williamsonia gigasnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(L.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;amp; H.).nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P. 187.

Fig. 4. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Williamsonia gigasnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(L.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;amp; H.).nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P. 184.

Fig. 5. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Williamsonia gigasnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(L.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;amp; H.).nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P. 185.

Fig. 6. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Williamsonia gigasnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;(L.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;amp; H.).nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P. 185.

Eig. 1. Willianisonia gigas (Lindley amp; Hutton). Page 188. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[38,785.]

Fig. 1. Oinkgo digitata (Broiigniart). Page 258. Pig, 2. Oinkgo digitata (Brongn,). P. 259.

Fig. 4. Baiera Phillipsi, Natliorst. P. 270. Fig. 5. Baiera gracilis, Bunb. P. 265.

Fig. 8. Oinkgo whiibiensis, Nath. P. 261. Fig. 9. Oinkgo digitata (Brongn.). P. 259.nbsp;Fig. 10. Oinkgo digitata (Brongn.). P. 259.nbsp;Fig. 11. Beania gracilis, Gamp;rvviihaxs. P. 276.

Fig. 5. Taxites zamioides (Leokeiiby, ex Beau MS.). P. 301. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,288.]

[39,251.]

Fig. 1. Laccopte,rw polypodioides i^xonpAamp;�i). Page 84. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,276.]

Fig. 1. CladopMebis denticidata (Brongniart). Page 142. Fig. 2. Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.). P. 95.

Fig. 6. Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.). x 3. P. 94. Fig. 7. Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.). P. 94.

Figs. 1 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;and 3. Todites Williamsoni (Brongniart). Page 93.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[13,491.]

Fig. 2. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Todites Williamsoni (Brongn.). P.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;93.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,234.]

Fig. 4. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Gladopklebis denticulata (Brongn.).nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;144.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,248.]

Fig. 5. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Gladopklebis denticulata (Brongn.).nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P,nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;143.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,240.]

B.M. JUBASSIC PLANTS.

Fig. 6. Goniopteris hymetwphylloides (Brongn.). P. 106. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[V. 3672.]

Fig. 8. Goniopteris quinqueloba {'PhiW.). nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;P.114.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,263]

B.M, JUilASSIC PLANTS.

Fig. 1. Sphmopter� Williamsoniy Brougiiiart. Pago 155. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[V. 8260.]

Fig. 3. Coniopteris hymenophylloides (Brocgn.). P. 108. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[40,467.]

PLATE XVIII.

[V. 2724.]

[39,220.]

[39,311.]

Filices, Sagenoptei�is.

Fig. 1. Equisetites columnaris, Broiigniart. Page 60. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[V. 2613a.]

Fig. 3. Equisetites columnaris, Brongn. P. 60. Fig. 4. Equisetites columnaris, Brongn. P. 61.

Fig. 5. Equisetites columnaris, Brongn. P, 58. (From a specimen in the Leckenby Collection, Cambridge.)

Figs. 1 and 2. Goniopteris hymenophylloides (Brougiiiart). Page 108. (From a specimen in the Whitbj Museum, No. 2373.)

B.M. JURASSIC PLANTS.

Fig. 2. Goniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongii.). P. 109. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[62,697.]

Figs. 3 and 3a. Goniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.). P. 110. (Leokenby Collection, Cambridge.)

Figs. 4 and 4a. Goniopteris hymenophylloides (Brongn.). P. 110. [62,660.] Fig. 5. Sphenopteria Murrayana (Brongn.). P. 156.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;[39,273.]

NAT�EAL IIISTOEY P�ELICATIONS OF THE TE�STEES OF THEnbsp;BEITISH MUSEUM.

The following publications can be purchased throtxgh the Agency of Messrs. Longmans amp; Co., 39, Paternoster Row ;nbsp;Mr. Quaritch, 15, Piccadilly ; Messrs. Kegan Paul,nbsp;Treinch, Tr�bnbr amp; Co., Paternoster House, Gharingnbsp;Gross Road ; and Messrs. DULAU amp; Co., 37, Soho Square;nbsp;or at the Natural History Museum, Gromwell Road,nbsp;Lcmdon, S.W.

Catalogue of the Specimens and Drawings of Mammals, Birds, Reptiles, and Fishes of Nepal and Tibet. Presentednbsp;by B. H. Hodgson, Esq., to the British Musuem. 2ndnbsp;edition. By John Edward Gray. Pp. xii., 90. [With annbsp;account of the Collection by Mr Hodgson.] 1863, 12ino.nbsp;2s. �6d.

Catalogue of the Mammalia and Birds of New Guinea in the Collection of the British Museum. [With list of Speciesnbsp;of New Guinea Birds, and those of the neighbouringnbsp;Localities.] By John Edward Gray, Ph.D., F.R.S., andnbsp;George Robert Gray, HL-S., amp;c. Pp. 63. Woodcuts.nbsp;1859, 8yo. Is. 6d.

Report on the Zoological Collections made in the Indo-Pacilic Ocean during the voyage of H.M.S. �Alert,� 1381-2. Pp. XXV., 684. 54 Plates. 1884, 8vo.

A Monograph of Oliristmas island (Indian Ocean) ; Physical Features and Geology by 0. W. Andrews, B.A., B.Sc.,nbsp;F.G.S., with descriptions of the Fauna and Flora bynbsp;numerous conti�ibutors. Pp. xv.,337: 22 plates (7 coloured),nbsp;a map, and 27 illustrations in text. [With Index.] 19��,nbsp;8vo. 20s.

MAMMALS.

List of the Specimens of Mammalia in the Collection of the British Museum. By Dr. J. E. Gray, F.R.S. Pp. xxviii.,nbsp;216. [With Systematic List of the Genera of Mammalia,nbsp;Index of Donations, and Alphabetical Index.] 1843,12mo.nbsp;2s. 6(7.

Catalogue of the Bones of Mammalia in the Collection of the British Museum. By Edward Gerrard. Pp. iv., 296.nbsp;1862, 8vo. 5s.

Catalogue of Monkeys, Lemurs, and Fruit-eating Bats in the Collection of the British Museum. By Dr. J. E. Graynbsp;F.R.S., amp;c. Pp. viii., 137. 21 Woodcuts. 1870, 8vo. 4s.

Catalogue of Carnivorous, Pachydermatous, and Edentate Mammalia in the British Museum. By John Edwardnbsp;Gray, F.R.S., amp;c. Pp. vii., 398. 47 Woodcuts. 1869,nbsp;8vo. 6s. 6(7.

Catalogue of Seals and Whales in the British Museum. By John Edward Gray, F.R.S., amp;c. 2nd edition. Pp. vii.,nbsp;402. 101 Woodcuts. 1866,8vo. 8s.

List of the Specimens of Cetacea in the Zoological Department of the British Museum. By William Henry Flower, LL.D., F.R.S., amp;o. [With Systematic and Alphabeticalnbsp;Indexes.] Pp. i^., 36. 1885, 8vo. Is. 6c7.

Catalogue of Ruminant Mammalia (Pecora, Linnseus) in the British Museum. By John Edward Gray, F.R.S., amp;c.nbsp;Pp. viii., 102. 4 Plates. 1872, 8vo. 3s. 6(7.

Catalogue of the Marsupialia and Monotremata in the Collection of the British Museum. By Oldfield Thomas.nbsp;Pp. xiii., 401. 4 coloured and 24 plain Plates. [Withnbsp;Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1888, 8vo. 17. 8s.

Cichlomorphce : Part III., containing the first portion of the family Timeliidse (Babbling Thrushes). Bynbsp;R. Bowdler Sharpe. Pp. xiii., 420. Woodcuts andnbsp;18 coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1881, 8vo. 1^.

Vol. VII. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;CAchlomorphcB : Part lY., containing the concludingnbsp;portion of the family Timeliidse (Babbling Thrushes).nbsp;By R. Bowdler Sharpe Pp. xvi., 698. Woodcuts andnbsp;15 coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1883, 8vo. 1/. �.*?.

Vol. VUL Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;CAchlomorphce Part V., containing the familiesnbsp;Paridas and Laniidse (Titmice and Shrikes) ; andnbsp;Gerthimnorpiue. (Creepers and Nuthatches). By Hansnbsp;Gadow, M.A., Ph.D. Pp. xiii., 386. Woodcuts andnbsp;9 coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1883, 8vo. 17s.

Vol. IX. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;Cinnyrimorphce, containing the families Nectariniidaenbsp;and Meliphagidae (Sun Birds and Honey-eaters). Bynbsp;Hans Gadow, M.A., Ph.D. Pp. xii., 310. Woodcutsnbsp;and 7 coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1884, 8vo. I4.s.

Vol. X. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;Fringilliformeti: Part I., containing the familiesnbsp;Dicffiidse, Hirundinidae, Ampelidaj, Mniotiltidse, andnbsp;MotacillidEe. By R. Bowdler Sharpe. Pp. xiii., 682.nbsp;Woodcuts and 12 coloured Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1885, 8vo. 1/. 2s.

Vol. XI. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;FringiUiforrneH : Part II.^ containing the familiesnbsp;Ccerebidse, Tanagridaj, and Icteridae. By Philip Lutleynbsp;Sclater, M.A., F.R.S. Pp. xvii., 431. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] Woodcuts and 18nbsp;coloured Plates. 1886, 8vo. 1^.

Vol. XII. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Percbing Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;Fringill'iformes: Part HI., containing the familynbsp;Pringillidse. By R. Bowdler Sharpe. Pp. xv.. 871.nbsp;Woodcuts and 16 coloured Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1888, 8vo. 11. 8.9.

Vol. XIII. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;Sturniform.es, containing the families Artamidae,nbsp;Sturnidse, Ploceidae, and Alaudidae. Also the familiesnbsp;Atrichiidas and Menuridse. R. Bowdler Sharpe.nbsp;Pp. xvi., 701. Woodcuts and 15 coloured Plates.nbsp;[With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1890,nbsp;8vo., 1/!. 8s.

Vol. XIV. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;Oligomyodce, or the families Tyrannidte, Oxyrham-phidas, Pipridse, Cotingidae, Phytotomidse, Philepittidas,nbsp;Pittidae, Xenicida3, and Eurylsemidss. By Philipnbsp;Lutley Sclater, M.A., F.R.S. Pp. xix., 494. Woodcutsnbsp;and 26 ooloirred Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1888, 8vo. \.l. 4s.

Vol. XV. Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;Tracheophonce. or the families Dendrocolaptidas,nbsp;Formicariidse. Conopophagidae, and Pteroptochidse.nbsp;By Philip Lutley Sclater, M.A., F.R.S. Pp. xvii., 371.nbsp;Woodcuts and 20 coloured Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1890, 8vo. 11.

Vol. XVI. Catalogue of the Picarise in the Collection of the British Museum. Upupce ana Trochili, by Osbertnbsp;Salvin. Coracice, of the families Cypselid�, Capri-mulgidas, Podargid�, and Steatornithid�, by Ernstnbsp;Hartert. Pp. xvi., 703. Woodcuts and 14 colourednbsp;Plates. [With Sj^stematic and Alphabetical Indexes.]nbsp;1892, 8vo. 1C 16s.

Vol. XVlI. Catalogue of the Picari� in the Collection of the British Museum. Coracice (contin.) andnbsp;Haley ones, with the families Leptosomatid�, Coraciid�,nbsp;Meropidffi, Alcedinid�, Momotid�, Totid� and Coliid�,nbsp;by R. Bowdler Sharpe. Bucerotes and Trogones bynbsp;W. R. Ogilvie Grant. Pp. xi., 522. Woodcuts and 17nbsp;coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabeticalnbsp;Indexes.] 1892, 8vo. 17. 10s.

Vol. XVIII. Catalogue of the Picari� in the Collection of the British Museum. Scansures, containing thenbsp;family Picid�. By Edward Hargitt. Pp. xv., 597.nbsp;Woodcuts and 15 coloured Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1890, 8vo. 11. 6s.

Vol. XIX. Catalogue of the Picari� in the Collection of the British Museum. Scansores and Coccyges : containing the families Rhamphastid�, Galbulid�, andnbsp;Bucconidffi, by P. L. Sclater; and the families Indi-catorid�, Capitonid�, Cuculid�, and Musophagid�, by

G. E. Shelley. Pp. xii., 484: lo coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1891,nbsp;8yo. 11. 5s.

Tol. XX. Catalogue of the Psittaci, or Parrots, in the Collection of the British Museum. By T. Salvadori.nbsp;Pp. xvii., 658 : Woodcuts and 18 coloured Plates.nbsp;[With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1891,nbsp;8vo. 1?. 10s.

Vol. XXI. Catalogue of the Columbse, or Pigeons, in the Collection of the British Museum. By T. Salvadori.nbsp;Pp. xvii., 676 : 15 coloured Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1893, 8vo. 11. 10s.

Vol. XXII. Catalogue of the Game Birds {Pterocletes, QalUnce, Opisthocomi, Hemipodii) in the Collection ofnbsp;the British Museum. By W. R. Ogilvie Grant.nbsp;Pp. xvi., 585 : 8 coloured Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1893, 8vo. 11. 6s.

Vol. XXIII. Catalogue of the Fulicarias (Rallid* and Heliornithidae) and Alectorides (Aramidse, Eurypy-gidae, Mesitidae, Rhinochetidae, Gruidae, Psophiidae,nbsp;and Otididfe) in the Collection of the British Museum.nbsp;By R. Bowdler Sharpe. Pp. xiii., 353 : 9 colourednbsp;Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.]nbsp;1894, 8vo. 20s.

Vol. XXIV. Catalogue of the Limicolae in the Collection of the British Museum. By R. Bowdler Sharpe.nbsp;Pp. xii., 794. Woodcuts and 7 coloured Plates. [Withnbsp;Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1896, 8vo.nbsp;17. 5s.

Vol. XXV. Catalogue of the Gaviae and Tubinares in the Collection of the British Museum. Gaviae (Terns,nbsp;Gulls, and Skuas,) by Howard Saunders. Tubinaresnbsp;(Petrels and Albatrosses), by Osbert Salvin. Pp. xv.,nbsp;475 ; woodcuts and 8 coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1896, 8vo. 17. Is.

Vol. XXVI. Catalogue of the Plataleae, Herodiones, Steganopodes, Pygopodes, iUcae, and Impennes in thenbsp;Collection of the British Museum. Plataleae (Ibisesnbsp;and Spoonbills) and Herodiones (Herons and Storks),nbsp;by R. Bowdler Sharpe. Steganopodes (Cormorants,nbsp;Gannets, Frigate-birds, Tropic-birds, and Pelicans),nbsp;Pygopodes (Divers and Grebes), Alcae (Auks), and Impennes (Penguins), by W. R. Ogilvie-Graiit. Pp. xvii.,nbsp;687 : Woodcuts and 14 coloured Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1898, 8vo. 17. 5s,

Vol. XXVII. Catalogue of the Chenomorphae (Pala-medeae, Phoenicopteri, Anseres), Crypturi, and Eatit* in the Collection of the British Museum. By T.nbsp;Salvador!. Pp. xv., 636 ; 19 coloured Plates. [Withnbsp;Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 189.5, 8vo.nbsp;11. 12s.

A Hand-list of the Genera and Species of Birds. [Nornen-clator Avium turn Fossilium turn Viventium.] By R. Bowdler Sharpe, Ll.D. :�

Vol. II. Pp. XV., 312. [With Systematic Index, and an Alphabetical Index to Vols. I. and II.] 1900,nbsp;8vo. 10s.

List of the Specimens of Birds in the Collection of the British Museum. By George Robert Gray :�

Part III., Sections III. and IV. Capitonidm and Picidse. Pp. 137. [With Index.] 1868, 12mo. Is. 6d.

Part V. Gallinse. Pp. iv., 120. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1867, 12mo. Is. 6(7.

Catalogue of the Birds of the Tropical Islands of the Pacific Ocean in the Collection of the British Museum. Bynbsp;George Robert Gray, F.L.S., amp;c. Pp. 72. [With annbsp;Alphabetical Index.] 1859, 8vo. Is. amp;d.

Catalogue of the. Tortoises, Crocodiles, and Amphisbaenians in the Collection of the British Museum. By Dr. J. E.nbsp;Gray, F.R.S., amp;c. Pp. viii., 80. [With an Alphabeticalnbsp;Index.] 1841, 12ino. Is.

Catalogue of Shield Reptiles in the Collection of the British Museum. By John Edward Gray, F.R.S., amp;c.;�

Part II. Emydosaurians, Ehynchocephalia, and Amphis-bsenians. Pp. vi., 41. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;25 Woodcuts. 1872, 4to,

Hand-List of the Specimens of Shield Reptiles in the British Museum. By Dr. J. E. Gray, F.R.S., F.L.S., amp;c.nbsp;Pp. iv., 124. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1873,nbsp;8VO. 4s.

Catalogue of the Chelonians, Rhynchocephalians, and Crocodiles in the British Museum (Natural History).nbsp;New Edition. By George Albert Boulenger. Pp. x., 311.nbsp;73 Woodcuts and 6 Plates. [With Systematic andnbsp;Alphabetical Indexes.] 1889, 8vo. 15s.

Catalogue of the Lizards in the British Museum (Natural History). Second Edition. By George Albert Boulenger ;�

Vol. I. Geckonidae, Eublepharidse, Uroplatidse, Pygo-podidae, Agamidae. Pp. xii., 436. 32 Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1885,8vo. 20s.

Vol. II. Iguanidae, Xenosauridae, Zonuridae, Anguidae, Anniellidae, Helodermatidae, Varanidae, Xantusiidae,nbsp;Teiidae, Amphisbasnidae. Pp. xiii., 497. 24 Plates.nbsp;[With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1885,nbsp;8vo. 20s.

Vol. III. Lacertidae, Gerrhosauridas, Scincidae, Anelytro-pidae, Dibamidae, Chamaeleontidae. Pp. xii., 575. 40 Plates. [With a Systematic Index and an Alphabeticalnbsp;Index to the three volumes.] 1887, 8vo. 11. 6s.

Catalogue of the Snakes in the British Museum (Natural History). By George Albert Boulenger, F.R.S.:�

Vol. I., containing the families Typhlopidae, Glauconiidffi, Boidae, llysiidae, Uropeltidae, Xenopeltidae, and Colu-bridaei aglyphae, part. Pp. xiii., 448: 26 Woodcutsnbsp;and 28 Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabeticalnbsp;Indexes.] 1893. 8vo. 11. Is.

Vol. IL, containing the conclusion of the Colubridae aglyphae. Pp. xi., 382 : 25 Woodcuts and 20 Plates.nbsp;[With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1894.nbsp;8vo. 17s. 6c7.

Vol. III., containing the Colubridae (Opisthoglyphae and Proteroglyphae), Amblycephalidae, and Viperidag.nbsp;Pp. xiv., 727 : 37 Woodcuts and 25 Plates. [Withnbsp;Systematic Index, and Alphabetical Index to the 3nbsp;volumes.] 1896, 8vo. 11. 6s.

Catalogue of Colubrine Snakes in the Collection of the Bi�itish Museum. By Dr. Albert Giinther. Pp. xvi., 281.nbsp;[With Geographic, Systematic, and Alphabetical Indexes.]nbsp;1858, 12mo. 4s.

Catalogue of the Batrachia Salientia in the Collection c C the British Museum. By Dr. Albert Giinther. Pp. xvi., IGO.nbsp;12 Plates. [With Systematic, Geographic, and Alphabeticalnbsp;Indexes.] 1858, 8vo. 6s.

FISHES.

Catalogue of the Fishes in the British Museum. Second edition. Vol. I. Catalogue of the Perciform Fishes in thenbsp;British Museum. Vol. I. Containing the Centrarchidsenbsp;Percidse, and Serranidse (part). By George Albertnbsp;Boulenger, F.R.S. Pp. xix., 394. Woodcuts and 15 Platesnbsp;[With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1895, 8vo.nbsp;15s.

List of the Specimens of Fish in the Collection of the British Museum. Part I. Ohondropterygii. By J. E. Gray.nbsp;Pp. X., 160. 2 Plates. [With Systematic and A1 phabeticalnbsp;Indexes.] 1851,12mo. 3s.

Catalogue of Fish collected and described by Laurence Theodore Gronow, now in the British Museum. Pp. vii.,nbsp;196. [With a Systematic Index.] 1854, 12mo. 3s. 6tf.

Catalogue of Apodal Fish in the Collection of the British Museum. ByDr. Kaup. Pp. viii., 163. 11 Woodcuts andnbsp;19 Plates. 1856, 8vo. 10s.

Catalogue of Lophobranchiate Fish in the Collection of the British Museum. By J. J. Kaup, Ph.D., amp;c. Pp. iv., 80.nbsp;4 Plates. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1856,12mo. 2.s.

MOLLUSCA.

Guide to the Systematic Distribution of Mollusca in the British Museum. Part I. By John Edward Gray, Ph.D.,nbsp;F.R.S., amp;c. Pp. xii., 230.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;121 Woodcuts. 1857, 8vo. 5s.

List of the Shells of the Canaries in the Collection of the British Museum, collected by MM. Webb and Berthelotnbsp;Described and figured by Prof. Alcide D�Oi�bigny in thenbsp;� Histoire Naturelle des Hes Canaries.� Pp. 32. 1854,nbsp;12mo. Is.

List of the Shells of Cuba in the Collection of the British Museum collected by M. Ramon de la Sagra. Describednbsp;by Prof. .Vicide d�Orbigny in the � Histoire de 1�Ile denbsp;Cuba.� Pp. 48. 1854, 12mo. Is.

List of the Shells of South America in the Collection of the British Museum. Collected and described by M. Alcidenbsp;D�Orbigny in the �Voyage dans PAm�rique M�ridionale.�nbsp;Pp. 89. 1854 12mo. 2s.

Catalogue of the Collection of Mazatlan Shells in the British Museum, collected by Frederick Reigen. Described bynbsp;Philip P. Carpenter. Pp. xvi., 552. 1857,12mo. 8s.

List of Mbllusca and Shells in the Collection of the � British Museum, collected and described by MM. Eydoux andnbsp;Souleyet in the �Voyage autour du Monde, executenbsp;�pendant les annees 1836 et 1837, sur la Corvette �Lanbsp;� Bonite,� � and in the � Ilistoire naturelle des Mollusquesnbsp;� Pt�ropodes.� Par MM. P. C. A. L. Rang et Souleyet.nbsp;Pp. iv., 27. 1855, 12mo. 8d.

Catalogue of the Phaneropneuniona, or Terrestial Operculated Mollusca, in the Collection of the British Museum. Bynbsp;Dr. L. Pfeiffer. Pp. 324. [With an Alphabetical Index.]nbsp;1852, 12mo. 5s.

Catalogue of Pulmonata, or Air Breathing Mollusca, in the Collection of the British Museum. Part I. By Dr. Louisnbsp;Pfeiffer. Pp. iv., 192. Woodcuts. 1855, 12mo. 2s. 6rf.

Catalogue of the Auriculidse, Proserpinidse, and Truncatellidse in the Collection of the British Museum. By Dr. Louisnbsp;Pfeiffer. Pp. iv., 150. Woodcuts. 1857, 12mo. Is. 9d.

List of the Mollusca in the Collection of the British Museum. By John Edward Gray, Ph.D., P.R.S., amp;c.

Catalogue of the Conchifera, or Bivalve Shells, in the Collection of the British Museum. By M. Deshayes :�

Part I. Veneridse, CyprinidiE, Glauconomidse, and Petricoladffi. Pp. iv., 216. 1853, 12mo. 3s.

Part II. Petricoladae (concluded); Corbiculadse. Pp. 217-292. [With an Alphabetical Index to the twonbsp;parts.] 1854, 12mo. 6d.

BRACHIOPODA.

Catalogue of Brachiopoda Ancjdopoda or Lamp Shells in the Collection of the British Museum. [Issued as � Cataloguenbsp;of the Mollusca, Part IV.�] Pp. iv., 128.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;25 Woodcuts.

POLYZOA.

Catalogue of Marine Polyzoa in the Collection of the British Musexrm. Part III. Cyclostomata. By George Busk,nbsp;F.R.S. Pp. viii., 39.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;38 Plates. [With a Systematic

Catalogue of the Specimens of Amphipodous Crustacea in the Collection of the British Museum. By C. Spence Bate,nbsp;F.R.S., amp;c. Pp. iv., 399.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;58 Plates. [With an Alpha

Descriptive Catalogue of the Spiders of Burma, based upon the Collection made by Eugene W. Oates and preserved innbsp;the British Museum. By 1�. Thorell. Pp. xxxvi., 406.nbsp;[With Systematic List and Alphabetical Index.] 1895,nbsp;8vo. 10s. 6d.

MYRIOPODA.

Catalogue of the Myriapoda in the Collection of the British Museum. By George Newport, F.R.S., P.E.S., amp;c. Part I.nbsp;Chilopoda. Pp. iv., 96. [With an Alphabetical Index.]nbsp;1856, 12mo. Is. 9d.

INSECTS.

Nomenclature of Coleopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum ;�

Part VI. Passalidse. By Frederick Smith. Pp. iv., 23. 1 Plate. [With Index.] 1852, 12mo. 8rf,

Part VII. Longicornia, I. By Adam White. Pp. iv., 174. 4 Plates. 1853, 12mo. 2s. amp;d.

Part VIII. Longicornia, II. By Adam White. Pp. 237. 6 Plates. 1855, 12mo. 3a. 6(7.

1�art IX. Cassididse. By Charles H. Boheman, Professor of Natural History, Stockholm. Pp. 22^ [Withnbsp;Index.] 1856, 12mo. 3s.

Illustrations of Typical Specimens of Coleoptera in the Collection of the British Museum. Part 1. Lycidas. Bynbsp;Charles Owen Waterhouse. Pp. x., 83.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;18 Coloured

Catalogue of the Coleopterous Insects of Madeira in the Collection of the British Museum. By T. Vernonnbsp;Wollaston, M.A., F.L.S. Pp. xvi., 234 : 1 Plate. [Withnbsp;a Topographical Catalogue and an Alphabetical Index.]nbsp;1857, 8vo. 3s.

Catalogue of the Coleopterous Insects of the Canaries in the Collection of the British Museum. By T. Vernonnbsp;Wollaston, M.A., F.L.S. Pp. xiii., 648. [With Topographical and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1864, 8vo. 10s. 65.

Catalogue of Halticidse in the Collection of the British Museum. By the Rev. Hamlet Clark, M.A., F.L.S.nbsp;Physapodes and Q�dipodes. Part I. Pp. xii., 301.nbsp;Frontispiece and 9 Plates. 1860, 8vo. 7s.

Catalogue of Hispidse in the Collection of the British Museum. By .Joseph S. Baly, M.E.S., amp;c. Parti. Pp. x.,nbsp;172.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;9 Plates. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1858,

List of the Specimens of Hymenopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker,

Part II. Chalcidites. Additional Species. Appendix. Pp. iv., 99-237. 1848, 12mo. 2s.

Catalogue of Hymenopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. By Frederick Smith. 12mo.:�

Part IV. Sphegidse, Larrida3, and Crabronidae. Pp. 207-497. 6 Plates. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1856, 6s.

Part VI. Formicidas. Pp. 216. 14 Plates. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1858, 6s.

List of Hymenoptera, with descriptions and figures of the Typical Specimens in the British Museum. Vol. I.,nbsp;Tenthredinidae and Siricidae. By W. F. Kirby.nbsp;Pp. xxviii., 450. 16 Coloured Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1882, 8vo. 11. 18s.

List of the Specimens of Dipterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker, F.L.S.nbsp;Part VII. Supplement III. Asilidse. Pp. ii., 507-775.nbsp;1855, 12mo. 3s. amp;d.

Catalogue of the Lepidoptera Phal^nae in the British Museum. By Sir George F. Hampson, Bart.

Vol. I. Catalogue of the Syntomidse in the Collection of the British Museum. Pp. xxi., 559 : 285 Woodcuts.nbsp;[With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1898,nbsp;8vo. 15s.

Vol. II. Catalogue of the Arctiad� (Nolin�, Litho-sian�) in the Collection of the British Museum. Pp. XX., 589 : 411 Woodcuts. [With Systematic andnbsp;Alijhabetical Indexes.] 1900, 8vo. 18s.

Illustrations of Typical Specimens of Lepidoptera Heterocera in the Collection of the British Museum :�

Part III. By Arthur Gardiner Butler. Pp. xviii., 82. 41-60 Coloured Plates. [With a Systematic Index.]nbsp;1879, 4to. 2/. 10s.

Part V. By Arthur Gardiner Butler. Pp. xii., 74. 78-100 Coloured Plates. [With a Systematic Index.]nbsp;1881, 4to. 27. 10s.

Part VI. By Arthur Gardiner Butler. Pp. xv., 89. 101-120 Coloured Plates. [With a Systematic Index.]nbsp;1886, 4to. 27. 4s.

Part VII. By Arthur Gardiner Butler. Pp. iv., 124. 121-138 Coloured Plates. [With a Systematic List.]nbsp;1889, 4to. 27.

Part VIII. The Lepidoptera Heterocera of the Nilgiri District. By George Francis Hampson. Pp. iv., 144.nbsp;139-156 Coloured Plates. [With a Systematic List.]nbsp;1891, 4to. 27.

Part IX. The Macrolepidoptera Heterocera of Ceylon. By George Francis Hampson. Pp. v., 182. 157-176.nbsp;Coloured Plates. [With a General Systematic List ofnbsp;Species collected in, or recorded from, Ceylon.] 1893,nbsp;4to. 27. 2.?.

Catalogue of Diurnal Lepidoptera of the family Satyridise in the Collection of the British Museum. By Arthur Gardinernbsp;Butler, F.L.S., amp;c. Pp. vi., 211. 5 Plates. [With annbsp;Alphabetical Index.] 1868, 8vo. 5.s. amp;d.

Catalogue of Diurnal Lepidoptera described by Fabricius in the Collection of the British Museum. By Arthur Gardinernbsp;Butler, F.L.S., amp;c. Pp. iv., 303. 3 Plates. 1869, 8vo. Is. 6rf.

Specimen of a Catalogue of Lycaenidse in the British Museum. By W. C. Hewitson. Pp. 15. 8 Coloured Plates. 1862,nbsp;4to. ll. Is.

List of Lepidopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. Part I. Papilionidse. By G. R. Gray, F.L.S.nbsp;Pp. 106. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1856, 12mo. 2s.

List of the Specimens of Lepidopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker.nbsp;12mo.

Part XIX. Pyralides. Pp. 799-1036. [With an Alphabetical Index to Parts XVI.-XIX.] 1859, 3s. M.

Catalogue of the Specimens of Neuropterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker,nbsp;12mo. :�

Part I. Phryganides�Perlides. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pp. iv., 192.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1852,

Part II. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Sialidae�Nemopterides.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Pp. ii., 193-476.

Catalogue of the Specimens of Neuropterous Insects iii the Collection of the British Museum. By Dr. H. Hagen.nbsp;Part I. Termitina. Pp. 34. 1858, 12mo. 6d.

Catalogue of Orthopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. Part I. Phasmidse. By John Obadiahnbsp;Westwood, F.L.S., amp;c. Pp. 195.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;48 Plates. [With an

Catalogue of the Specimens of Blattarise in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker, F.L.S., amp;c.nbsp;Pp. 239. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1868,8vo. 5s. 6c?.

Catalogue of the Specimens of Dermaptera Saltatoria [Part I.] and Supplement to the Blattarise in the Collection of thenbsp;British Museum. Gryllidse. Blattarise. Locustidse. Bynbsp;Francis Walker, F.L.S., amp;c. Pp. 224. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1869, 8to. 5s.

Catalogue of the Specimens of Dermaptera Saltatoria in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker,nbsp;F.L.S., amp;c.�

Part II. LocustidiB (continued). Pp. 225-423. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1869, 8vo. 4s. amp;d.

Part III. Locustidse (continued).�Acrididas. Pp. 425-604. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1870, 8vo. 4s.

Part IV. Acrididee (continued). Pp. 605-809. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1870, 8vo. 6s.

Part V. Tettigidie.�Supplement to the Catalogue of Blattarias.�Supplement to the Catalogue of Dermapteranbsp;Saltatoria (with remarks on the Geographical Distribution of Dermaptera). Pp. 811-850;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;43; 116.

Catalogue of the Specimens of Heteropterous Hemiptera in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker,nbsp;F.L.S., amp;c. 8vo. :~

Part II. Scutata (continued). Pp. 241-417. 1867. 4s. Part III. Pp. 418-599. [With an Alphabetical Index tonbsp;Parts I., II., III., and a Summary of Geographicalnbsp;Distribution of the Species mentioned.] 1868. 4s.

List of the Specimens of Homopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum. By Francis Walker. Supplement. Pp. ii., 369. [With an Alphabetical Index.] 1858, 12mo., 4s. 6f7.

Catalogue of the Species of Entozoa, or Intestinal Worms, contained in the Collection of the British Museum. Bynbsp;Dr. Baird. Pp. iv., 132. 2 Plates. [With an Index ofnbsp;the Animals in which the Entozoa mentioned in thenbsp;Catalogue are found, and an Index of Genera andnbsp;Species.] 1853, 12mo. 2s.

Catalogue of Sea-pens or Pennatulariidse in the Collection of the British Museum. By J. E. Gray, F.R.S., amp;c. Pp. iv.,nbsp;40. 2 Woodcuts. 1870, 8vo. Is. 6d.

Catalogue of Lithophytes or Stony Corals in the Collection of the British Museum. By J. E. Gray, F.R.S., amp;c.nbsp;Pp. iv., 51. 14 Woodcuts. 1870, 8vo. 3s.

Catalogue of the Madreporarian Corals in the British Museum (Natural History):�

Vol. I. The Genus Madrepora. By George Brook. Pp. xi., 212. 35 Collotype Plates. [With Systematicnbsp;and Alphabetical Indexes and Explanation of thenbsp;Plates.] 1893, 4to. 1/. 4s,

Vol. II. The Genus Turbinaria ; the Genus Astrseopora. By Henry M. Bernard, M.A. Cantab., P.L.S., F.Z.S.nbsp;Pp. iv., 106. 30 Collotj'pe and 3 Lithographic Plates.nbsp;[With Index of Generic and Specific Names, andnbsp;Explanation of the Plates.] 1896, 4to. 18s.

Vol. III. The Genus Montipora ; the Genus Anacro-pora. By Henry M. Bernard, M.A. Pp. vii., 192. 30 Collotype and 4 Lithographic Plates. [With Systematic Index, Index of Generic and Specific Names,nbsp;and Explanation of the Plates.] 1897, 4to. 1/. 4,s'.

Catalogue of British Birds in the Collection of the British Museum. By George Robert Gray, F.L.S., F.Z.S., amp;c.nbsp;Pp. xii., 248. [With a List of Species.] 1863, 8vo. 3.s. 6d.

Catalogue of British Hymenoptera in the Collection of the British Mu.seum. Second edition. Part 1. Andrenidgenbsp;and Apidee. By Frederick Smith, M.E.S. New Issue.nbsp;Pp. xi., 236. 11 Plates. [With Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1891, 8vo. 6s.

Catalogue of British Fossorial tlymenoptera, Formicidas, and Vespidae in the Collection of the British Museum. Bynbsp;Frederick Smith, V.P.E.S. Pp. 236.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;6 Plates. [With an

A Catalogue of the British Non-parasitical Worms in the Collection of the British Museum. By George Johnston,nbsp;M.D., Edin., F.R.C.L., Ed., Ll.LL, Marischal Coll., Aberdeen, amp;c. Pp. 365. Woodcuts and 24 Plates. [With annbsp;Alphabetical Index.] 1865, 8vo. 7s.

Catalogue of the British Echinoderms in the British Museum (Natural History). By F. Jeffrey Bell, M.A. Pp. xvii., 202.nbsp;Woodcuts and 16 Plates (2 Coloxired). [With Table ofnbsp;Contents, Tables of Distribution, Alphabetical Index,nbsp;Description of the Plates, amp;c.] 1892, 8vo. 12s. 6d.

List of the Specimens of British Animals in the Collection of the British Museum; with Synonyma and Referencesnbsp;to figures. 12mo.:�

Part V. Lepidoptera. By J. F. Stephens. 2nd Edition. Revised by H. T. Stainton and E. Shepherd. Pp. iv.,nbsp;224. 1856. Is. 9d.

Part VII. Mollusca, Acephala and Brachiopoda. By Dr. J. E, Gray. Pp. iv., 167. 1851, 3s. 6c7.

Part VIII. Fish. By Adam White. Pp. xxiii., 164. (With Index and List of Donors.) 1851. 3s. amp;d.

Part XIII. Nomenclature of Hymenoptera. By Frederick Smith. Pp. iv., 74. 1853. Is. M.

Part XVI. Lepidoptera (completed). By H. T. Stainton. Pp. 199. [With an Index.] 1854. 3s.

Part XVII. Nomenclature of Anoplura, Euplexoptera, and Orthoptera. Bv Adam White. Pp. iv., 17.nbsp;1855, 6rf.

Illustrations of the Botany of Captain Cook�s Voyage Round the World in H.M.S. �Endeavour� in 1768-71. By thenbsp;Right Hon. Sir Joseph Banks, Bart., K.B., P.R.S., andnbsp;Dr. Daniel Solander, F.R.S. With Determinations bj'nbsp;James Britten, F.L.S, Senior Assistant, Department ofnbsp;Botany, British Museum. Part I.�Australian Plants.nbsp;101 Copper-plates [after paintings by F. P. Nodder], withnbsp;31 pages of descriptive text. 1900, fol. 25s.

Catalogue of the African Plants collected by Dr. Friedrich Welwitsch in 1853-61.�Dicotyledons. By William Philipnbsp;Hiern, M.A., F.L.S., amp;c.:�

Part 1. [Ranunculacese to Rhizophoracese.] Pp. xxvi., 336. [With Portrait of Dr. Welwitsch, Introduction,nbsp;Bibliography, and Index of Genera.] 1896,8vo. 7s. 6d.

Part II. Combretaceas to Rubiacese. Pp. 337-510. [With Index of Genera.] 1898, 8vo. 4s.

Part III. Dipsaceae to Scrophulariaceae. Pp. 511-784. [With Index of Genera.] 1898, 8vo. 5s.

Vol. II., Part I. Monocotyledons and Gymnosperms. By Alfred Barton Rendle, M.A., D.Sc. F.L.S., Assistant.nbsp;Department of Botany. Pp. 260, [With Index ofnbsp;Genera.] 1899, 8vo. 6s,

A Monograph of Lichens found in Britain : being a Descriptive Catalogue of the Species in the Herbarium of the British Museum. By the Rev. James M. Crombie, M.A.,nbsp;F.L.S., F.G.S., amp;c. Part I. Pp. viii., 519 : 74 Woodcuts.nbsp;[With Glossary, Synopsis, Tabular Conspectus, and Index.]nbsp;1894, 8vo. 16s.

A Monograph of the Mycetozoa: being a Descriptive Catalogue of the Species in the Herbarium of the British Museum.nbsp;By Arthur Lister, F.L.S. Pp. 2M.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;78 Plates and 51

Woodcuts. [With Synopsis of Genera and List of Species, and Index-] 1894, 8vo, 15s.

List of British Diatomaceas in the Collection of the British Museum. By the Rev, W, Smith, F.L.S., amp;c, Pp. iv., 55.nbsp;1859, 12mo, 1,'?,

Catalogue of the Fossil Mammalia in the British Museum (Natural History). By Richard Lydekker, B.A., F.G.S.:�

Part I. Containing the Orders Primates, Chiroptera, Insectivora, Carnivora, and Rodentia. Pp. xxx., 268.nbsp;33 Woodcuts. [With Systematic and Alphabeticalnbsp;Indexes.] 1885, 8vo. 5s.

Part II. Containing the Order Ungulata, Suborder Artiodactyla. Pp. xxii., 324. 39 Woodcuts. [Withnbsp;Systematic and Alphabetical Indexes.] 1885, 8vo. 6s.

Part III. Containing the Order Ungulata, Suborders Perissodactyla, Toxodontia, Condylarthra, and Ambly-poda. Pp. xvi., 186. 30 Woodcuts. [With Systematicnbsp;Index, and Alphabetical Index of Genera and Species,nbsp;including Synonyms.] 1886, 8vo. 4s.

Part IV. Containing the Order Ungulata, Suborder Proboscidea. Pp. xxiv., 235. 32 Woodcuts. [Withnbsp;Systematic Index, and Alphabetical Index of Generanbsp;and Species, including Synonyms.] 1886, 8vo. 5s.

Part V. Containing the Group Tillodontia, the Orders Sirenia, Cetacea, Edentata, Marsupialia, Monotremata,nbsp;and Supplement. Pp. xxxv., 345.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;55 Woodcvrts.

[With Systematic Index, and Alphabetical Index of Genera and Species, including Synonyms.] 1887,nbsp;8vo. 6s.

Catalogue of the Fossil Birds in the British Museum (Natural History). By Richard Lydekker, B.A. Pp. xxvii., 368.nbsp;75 Woodcuts. [Mhth Systematic Index, and Alphabeticalnbsp;Index of Genera and Species, including Synonyms.] 1891,nbsp;8yo. 10s,

Catalogue of the Fossil Reiotilia and Amphibia in the British Museum (Natural History). By Richard Lydekker, B.A.,

Part I. Containing the Orders Ornithosauria, Crocodilia, Dinosauria, Squamata, Rhynchocephalia, and Pro-terosauria. Pp. xxviii., 309. 69 Woodcuts. [Withnbsp;Systematic Index, and Alphabetical Index of Generanbsp;and Species, including Synonyms.] 1888, 8vo. 7s. amp;d.

Part II. Containing the Orders Ichthyopterygia and Sauropterygia. Pp. xxi., 307. 85 Woodcuts. [Withnbsp;Systematic Index, and Alphabetical Index of Generanbsp;and Species, including Synonyms.] 1889, 8vo. 7s.

Part III. Containing the Order Chelonia. Pp. xviii., 239. 53 Woodcuts. [With Systematic Index, andnbsp;Alphabetical Index of Genera and Species, includingnbsp;Synonyms.] 1889, 8vo. 7s. 6c7.

Part IV. Containing the Orders Anomodontia, Ecaudata� Caudata, and Labyrinthodontia; and Supplement.nbsp;Pp. xxiii., 295.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;66 Woodcuts. [With Systematic

Index, Alphabetical Index of Genera and Species, including Synonyms, and Alphabetical Index ofnbsp;Genera and Species to the entire work.] 1890, 8vo.nbsp;7s. 6d

Catalogue of the Fossil Fishes in the British Museum (Natural History). By Arthur Smith Woodward, F.G.S., F.Z.S.:�

Part I. Containing the Elasmobranchii. Pp. xlvii., 474. 13 Woodcuts and 17 Plates. [With Alphabeticalnbsp;Index, and Systematic Index of Genera and Species.]nbsp;1889, 8vo. 21s.

Part II. Containing the Elasmobranchii (Acanthodii), Holocephali, Ichthyodorulites, Ostracodermi, Dipnoi,nbsp;and Teleostomi (Crossopterygii and Chondrosteannbsp;Actinopterygii). Pp. xliv., .567.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;58 Woodcuts and

16 Plates. [With Alphabetical Index, and Systematic Index of Genera and Species.] 1891, 8vo. 2Is.

Part III. Containing the Actinopterygian Teleostomi of the Orders dwndrostei (concluded), Protospondyli,nbsp;Aetheospondyli, and Itsospondyli (in part). Pp. xlii.,nbsp;544. 45 Woodcuts and 18 Plates. [With Alphabeticalnbsp;Index, and Systematic Index of Genera and Species.]nbsp;1895, 8vo. 21 s.

Systematic List of the Edwards Collection of British Oligocene and Eocene Mollusca in the British Museum (Naturalnbsp;History), with references to the type-specimens fromnbsp;similar horizons contained in other collections belonging

to the Geological Department of the Museum. By Richard Bullen Newton, F.G.S. Pp. xxviii., 36.5. [With table ofnbsp;Families and Genera, Bibliography, Correlation-table,nbsp;Appendix, and Alphabetical Index.] 189.1, 8vo. Cs.

Catalogue of Tertiary Mollusca in the Department of Geology, British Museum (Natural History). Part I. The Australasian Tertiary Mollusca. By George F. Harris, F.6.S., etc.nbsp;Pp. xxvi., 407. 8 Plates. [With Table of Families, Genera,nbsp;and Subgenera, and Index.] 1897, 8vo. lO.s.

Catalogue of the Fossil Cephalopoda in the British Museum (Natural History) :�

Parti. Containing part of the SuborderNautiloidea,consisting of the families Orthoceratidas, Endoceratidae, Actinoceratidse, Gomphooeratidse, Ascoceratidae,nbsp;Poterioceratidae, Cyrtoceratidae, and Supplement. Bynbsp;Arthur H. Foord, F.G.S. Pp. xxxi., 344. 51 Woodcuts.nbsp;[With Systematic Index, and Alphabetical Index ofnbsp;Genera and Species, including Synonyms.] 1888,nbsp;8vo. 10s. 6d.

Part II. Containing the remainder of the Suborder Nautiloidea, consisting of the families Lituitidas,nbsp;Trochoceratidas, Nautilidse, and Supplement. Bynbsp;Arthur H. Foord, F.G.S. Pp. xxviii., 407. 86 Wood-cuts. [With Sj�stematic Index, and Alphabeticalnbsp;Index of Genera and Species, including Synonyms.]nbsp;1891, 8vo. 15s.

Part HI. Containing the Bactritidse, and part of the Subarder Amraonoidea. By Arthur H. Foord, Ph.D.,nbsp;F.G.S., and George Charles Crick, A.R.S.M., F.G.S.nbsp;Pp. xxxiii., 303. 146 Woodcuts. [With Systematicnbsp;Index of Genera and Species, and Alphabetical Index.]nbsp;1897, 8vo. 12s. amp;d.

List of theTypes and Figured Specimens of Fossil Cephalopoda in the British Museum (Natural History). By G. C. Crick,nbsp;F.G.S. Pp. 103. [ With Index.] 1898, 8vo. 2s. 6c7.

A Catalogue of British Fossil Crustacea, with their Synonyms and the Range in Time of each Genus and Order. Bynbsp;Henry Woodward, F.R.S. Pp. xii., 155. [With annbsp;Alphabetical Index.] 1877, 8vu. 5s.

Catalogue of the Fossil Bryozoa in the Department of Geology^, British Museum (Natural History):�

The Jurassic Bryozoa. By J. W. Gregory, D.Sc., F.G.S., F.Z.S. Pp. [viii.,] 239 : 22 Woodcuts and 11 Plates.nbsp;[With liist of Species and Distribution, Bibliography,nbsp;Index, and Explanation of Plates.] 1896, 8vo. 10s.

The Cretaceous Bi�yozoa. Vol. 1. By J. W. Gregory, D.So., F.G.S., F.Z.S. t'p. xiv., 457 : 64 Woodcutsnbsp;and 17 Plates. [With Index and Explanation ofnbsp;Plates.] 1899, 8vo. 16.s.

Catalogue of the Blastoidea in the Geological Department of the British Museftin (Natural History), with an account ofnbsp;the morphology and systematic position of the group, andnbsp;a revision of the genera and species. By Robert Etheridge,nbsp;juu., of the Department of Geologj% British Museumnbsp;(Natural History), and P. Herbert Carpenter, D.Sc., F.R.S.,nbsp;F.L.S. (of Eton College). Pp. xv., 322. 20 Plates. [Withnbsp;Preface by Dr. H. Woodward, Table of Contents, Generalnbsp;Index. Explanations of the Plates, amp;c.] 18(S6, 4to. 25s.

The Genera and Species of Blastoidea, with a List of the Specimens in the British Museum (Natural History). Bynbsp;F. A. Bather, M.A., F.G.S., of the Geological Department.nbsp;Pp. X., 70. 1 Woodcut. 1899, 8vo. 3s.

Catalogue of the Fossil Sponges in the Geological Department of the British Museum (Natural History). With descriptions of new and little known species. By Georgenbsp;Jennings Hinde, Ph.D., F.G.S. Pp. viii., 248. 38 Plates.nbsp;[With a Tabular List of Species, arranged in Zoologicalnbsp;and Stratigraphical sequence, and an Alphabetical Index.]nbsp;1883, 4to. 11. 10s.

Catalogue of the Fossil Foraminifera in the British Museum (Natural History). By Professor T. Rupert Jones, F.R.S.,nbsp;amp;c. Pp. xxiv., 100. [With Geographical and Alphabeticalnbsp;Indexes.] 1882, 8vo.' 5s.

Catalogue of the Palaeozoic Plants in the Department of Geology and Palaeontology, British Museum (Naturalnbsp;History). By Robert Kidston, F.G.S. Pp. viii., 288.nbsp;[With a list of works quoted, and an Index.] 1886nbsp;8vo. 5s.

Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the Department of Geology, British Museum (Natural History). The Wealdennbsp;Flora. By A. C. Seward, M.A., F.G.S., University Lecturernbsp;in Botany, Cambridge :�

Part I. Thallophyta�Pteridophyta. Pp. xxxviii., 179 : 17 Woodcuts and 11 Plates. [With Preface by Dr.nbsp;Woodward, Alphabetical Index of Genera, Species, amp;c.nbsp;Explanations of the Plates, amp;c.] 1894, 8vo. 10s.

Part II. Gymnospermae. Pp. viii., 259. 9 Woodcuts and 20 Plates. (With Alphabetical Index, Exj)lana-tions of the Plates, amp;c.] 1895, 8vo. 15s.

Guide to the Galleries of Mammalia in the Department of Zoology of the British Museum (Natural History). 6thnbsp;Edition. Pp. 120. 57 Woodcuts and 4 Plans. Index.nbsp;2898, 8vo. 6(2.

Guide to the Galleries of Reptiles and Pishes in the Department of Zoology of the British Museum (Natural History). 4thEdition. Pp. iv.,119. lOlWoodcuts. Index. 1898. 8vo. 6(2.

A Guide to the Fossil Mammals and Birds in the Department of Geology and Palaeontology in the British Museumnbsp;(Natural History). 7th Edition. [By Henry Woodward.]nbsp;Pp. xii., 103. 116 Woodcuts. [With List of Illustrations,nbsp;Table of Stratified Rocks, and Index.] 1896, 8vo. 6(2.

A Guide to the Fossil Reptiles and Fishes in the Department of Geology and Paljeontology in the British Museumnbsp;(Natural History). [By Henry Woodward.] Pp. xiv.,nbsp;129 : 165 Woodcuts. [With List of Illustrations, Tablenbsp;of Stratified Rocks, and Index.] 1896, 8vo. 6(2.

A Guide to the Fossil Invertebrates and Plants in the Department of Geology and Pateontology in the Britishnbsp;Museum (Natural History). [By Henry Woodward.]nbsp;Pp. xvi., 158. 182 Woodcuts. [With List of Illustrations,nbsp;Table of Stratified Rocks, Introduction, and Index.] 1897,nbsp;8vo. Is.

Parti. Mollusca to Bryozoa. Pp. xii., 64. 107 Woodcuts. [With List of Illustrations, Table of Stratified Rocks, and Introduction.] 1897, 8vo. 6(2.

Part II. Insecta to Plants, amp;c. Pp. ix., 64*-158. Woodcuts 108-182. [With List of Illustrations andnbsp;Index to the two parts.] 1897, 8vo. 6(2.

Guide to Sowerby�s Models of British Fungi in the Depart-inent of Botany, British Museum (Natural History). By Worthington G. Smith, F.L.S. Pjj. 82. 93 Woodcuts.nbsp;With Table of Diagnostic Characters, and Index.nbsp;[2nd Edition.] 1898, 8vo. 4(2.

Guide to the British Mycetozoa exhibited in the Department of Botany, British Museum (Natural History). By Arthurnbsp;Liister, F.L.S. Pp. 42.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;44 Woodcuts. Index. 1895,

A Guide to the Mineral Gallery of the British Museum (Natural History). [By L. Fletcher, M.A., F.R.S.] Pp. 32.nbsp;Plan. 1898, 8vo. Id.

The Student�s Index to the Collection of Minerals, British Museum (Natural History). [By L. Fletcher, M.A., F.R.S.]nbsp;Pp. 34. With a Plan of the Mineral Gallery. 1899,nbsp;8vo. 2d.

An Introduction to the Study of Minerals, with a Guide to the Mineral Gallery of the British Museum (Naturalnbsp;History). By L. Fletchei', M.A., F.E.S. Pp. 123.nbsp;41 Woodcuts. With Plan of the Mineral Gallery andnbsp;Index. 1897, 8vo.

An Introduction to the Study of Rocks. By L. Fletcher, M.A., F.R.S. Pp. 118. [With plan of the Mineral Gallery, Tablenbsp;of Contents, and Index.] 1898, 8vo. 6d.

An Introduction to the Study of Meteorites, with a List of the Meteorites represented in the Collection. By L.nbsp;Fletcher, M.A., F.R.S. Pp. 95. [With a Plan of thenbsp;Mineral Gallery, and an Index to the Meteorites represented in the Collection.] 1896, 8vo. 6d.

PRINTED FOR HER MAJESTY�S STATIONERY OFFICE, Bt darling amp; SON, Ltd., 34-40, Bacon Street. E,nbsp;1900,

XU		LIST OF FIOIJRES.	TAGE
Fig.	29.	Willianuonia gig as (L. amp; H.) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.	. . . 188
} gt;	30.	Cycadean stem.........	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;194
) )	31.	� Pterophyllmn rigidum,� And.....	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;195
n	32.	� Ptilophyllum cutohense, � Morr.....	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;195
) )	33.	Williamsoniapecten (Phill.) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;....	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;198
gt;gt;	34.	WilUamsonia pecten (Phill.) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;....	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;199
	35.	Williamsonia pecten (Phill.) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;....	. . . 201
) J	36.	Anomozamites Nilssoni (Phill.) ....	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;205
?5	37.	Otozamites, sp..........
	38.	? Otozamites, sp..........
5gt;	39.	Nilssonia compta (Phill.)......
n	40.	Nilssonia compta (Phill.)......
J 5	41.	Nilssonia tenuinervis, �lath......
5 J	42.	Ctenis, sp...........
J)	43.	Ctenis, sp...........
	44.	Podozamites lanceolatus (L. amp; H.) .	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;245
n	45.	Pollen-sacs (? Oinhgo digitata) ....	. . . 260
5 J	46.	Baiera Lindleyana (Schimp.) ....
gt; gt;	47.	Baiera Phillipsi, Nath.......	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. 270
J gt;	48.	Czekanowskia Murrayana (L. amp; H.) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,	. . . nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;278
J �	49.	Czeltanowshia Murrayana (L. amp; H.) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.	. . . 281
)gt;	50.	Czekanowskia Murrayana (L. amp; H.)	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;283
n	51.	Nageiopsis anglica, sp. nov......	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;289
)j	52.	Pagiophyllum Williamsoni (Brongn.) .	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. . 293
	53.	Cheirolepis setosus (Phill.).....	. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;. 296

Fig,	1.	Geological Sketch-map of part of East Yorkshire .	PAGE 17
?J	2.	Marchantites ereetm (Leek., ex Bean MS.) . nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;.	50
J gt;	3.	E(iuisetite� eolumnaris, Brongn........	57
7 )	4.	Equisetites eolumnaris, Brongn........	62
J7	5.	Equisetites Beani (Bunh.)........	64
))	6.	Equisetites Beani (Bunh.)........	66
gt;J	7.	Matonidium Goepperti (Ett.).......	76
7 7	8.	Laccopterispohjpodioides (Brongn.).....	80
77	9.	? Laccopteris polypodioides (Brongn.).....	81
77	10.	Laccopteris polypodioides (Brongn.).....	83
77	11.	Laccopteris Woodwardi (Leek.) and L. polypodioides
		(Brongn.)............	85
77	12.	Todites WilUamsoni (Brongn.).......	94
77	13.	Bichsonia Bertervana, Hook........	104
7 7	14.	Coniopteris quinqueloha (Phill.).......	113
77	15.	Coniopteris quinqueloha (Phill.).......	114
7 7	16.	Coniopteris arguta (L. amp; H.).......	117
7 7	17.	Bictyophyllim rugosum (L. amp; H.)......	125
77	18.	Bictyophjllum rugosum (L. amp; H.)......	127
77	19.	Bictyophyllum rugosum (L. amp; H.)......	128
77	20.	Cladoplilebis lohifolia (Phill.).......	147
77	21.	Cladophlehis lohifolia (Phill.).......	147
7 7	22.	Cladophlehis lohifolia (Phill.).......	148
7 7	23.	Cladophlehis lohifolia (Phill.).......	149
7�	24.	Sagenopteris Phillipsi (Brongn.)......	166
77	25.	Sagempteris Pliilhpsi (Brongn.)......	168
77	26.	Sagenopterts Phtllipsi (Brongn.), var. major	169
7 7	27.	Pachypteris lanceolata, Brongn.......	173
77	28.	Pachypteris lanceolata, Brongn.......	174

BllYOPHYTA ......	1	1
Equisetaies ...	3	2
Eimces............	21	20
Ctcadales ......	19	23
Conifer.�.........	15	9

ife

REFERENCE DEPARTMENT.