Page:Journal of botany, British and foreign, Volume 34 (1896).djvu/255

 THE WEALDEN FLORA. 233 that this fossil may have some affinity to the seed-like bodies which have been described under the name of Oolithes sphcericus, a specimen of which is figured on the same plate as the Androstrobus. To Conites is referred a previously-described species as C. elegans. Mr. Seward has some ''hesitation in choosing the most suitable generic term for cone-like fossils of doubtful affinity"; he selects the genus of Sternberg, overlooking the anomaly that at p. 113 he has the genus representing supposed CycadecB, and at p. 222 repre- senting ConifercB, but he suggests that one may give " expression to any bias towards one or other group of plants by adding the word Cycadea or Conifera as qualifying epithets to the more compre- hensive generic name." Under Cycadean trunks Mr. Seward describes Bucklandia anomala, a new species of Fittonia, three species of Bennettites (of which one is new), and a species of Yatesia. The views of Saporta we fear have been too hastily adopted by the author as to the generic identity of Bennettites and Williamsonia. The three doubtful genera which follow the Cycadean are first Wlthamia, a name proposed to replace Cycadorachis of Saporta, which was applied to an almost identical fossil, because " a purely provisional name like Withamia seems decidedly prefer- able for the present species, to one which in any way implies a definite botanical position. It is by no means clear how such a plant can well be included with Cycadacea ; and we have no evidence of sufficient value to enable us to assign the species to any other particular group." The second genus, Becklesia^ is based on specimens "difficult to describe with any completeness, on account of the fragmentary and imperfect nature of the material. So far as I have been able to discover, it is impossible to include these fossils in any known genus." The last of these doubtful genera is Dichopteris, which "it is safer, while expressing a bias towards the pteridophytic nature of the genus, to speak of it as occupying a somewhat doubtful position." Of the ConifercB four species are referred to Pinites, two of which are new. P. Solmsi is based on specimens which "closely resemble " a species of Gardner, "but in view of the much more perfect nature of the Rufford material, and the doubtful identity of Gardner's type, I have ventured to found a new species." P. Ruffordi is founded on a specimen of coniferous wood, a detailed description of which it is proposed to publish elsewhere. Two known species of Sphenolepis are figured ; a new Thuites, based on a " single specimen of a leafy twig"; a species of Pagiophyllum, two species of Brachy- phylliim (one being new), and a new species of Conites. The two parts (would it not have been better to call them volumes, as they are independently paged, prefaced, and indexed ?) of the Wealden Flora form a valuable addition to our knowledge of palaeo-botany. Mr. Seward has done his work honestly and carefully, though we have often wished it had also been concisely. We hope that in future the author will not continue his present method of naming species, but follow that proposed by De Candolle and followed by most botanists. Mr. Dyer's address and the prefixed remarks of the Editor in the March number of this Journal will throw light on