168 OEIGTNAL ARTICLES. 



the fossil fragment. In some species the upper surface of the leaves 

 is beset with tufted or stellate hairs. 



18. Apocynacece and AsclepiadecB. — Evidence does not appear suffi- 

 cient to show that both orders have been met with. 



19. Liquid amhar. — Prof Heer's figs, h, c, d, Tab. Ixxxvii answer 

 very well to Liquidamhar fruits ; figs. 2 a and h, of Tab. li. however 

 jnay be something quite different, the carpels appearing to be almost 

 free and superior. The figure which Prof. Heer copies, with proper 

 acknowledgment, from Schnitzlein is worse than useless. Schnitz- 

 lein's figure seems to me to be copied or adapted from Hayne 

 (Gewachse, xi. 25). Both botanists figure the ovules, moreover, as 

 attached to the dorsal suture. The fruit is fairly represented by 

 Gaertner {De Fruct. xc. e.) and Lamarck (copied from the former), 

 Tab. 783, 2. Tlie fruits of four species are in the Kew Herbarium. 



20. Pisonia. — This appears extremely doubtful. Tlie slender 

 object, fig. 48, Tab. cliii. borrowed from Ettingshausen, can scarcely 

 be a young fruit of Pisonia, tapered to so fine a point, without trace 

 of the upper part of the perianth. 



21. Sassafras ^sculapii. — A doubtful member of the genus. Apart 

 from its entire outline, the leaf (Tab. xc. 14) seems too acute. 



22. Persea Braimii, if a Laurel, I think as likely to find its 

 analogue in Asia as in America. P. Carolinejtsis, has proportionally 

 narrower leaves, and the secondary veins are hardly prominent 

 enough. P. Gratissima is, in some respects, more like P. Praunii, 

 but its petioles are longer. P. costata, Nees. is perhaps as near to 

 it as either. I do not find the same tendency to obovate outline in 

 P. indica. 



23. ElceagnecB rest upon very insufficient data ; only leaf remains. 



24. Euphorbia is extremely doubtful, also Eupliorhiophyllum, a 

 genus of Ettingshausen's. 



25. Plataneae. — Prof. Heer, speaking of the Tertiary forms of 

 Platanus, (PI. Tert. ii. 74) says that if we refer existing forms to the 

 two species of Linnaeus, that found in the middle Miocene of 

 Radoboj (Croatia) may be compared to P. orientalis, while that of the 

 upper Miocene of Schossnitz (Silesia) and of the Swiss deposits, be- 

 longs to the P. occidentalis series. Dr. Hooker called my attention 

 to an observation of Miller in his " Grardener's Dictionary" (1731), 

 which it may be worth while copying. Of P. orientalis aceris folio, 

 he says, " * * although by some supposed to be a distinct species 

 from either of the former (P. orientalis and P. occidentalis) yet is 

 no more but a seminal variety of the first, for I have had many plants 

 which came up from the seeds of the first sort, which ripened in the 

 Physick Grarden (at Chelsea), which do most of them degenerate to this 

 third sort, which, in the manner of its leaves, seems to be difterent 

 from either, and might reasonably be supposed a distinct sort by 

 those who have not traced its original." 



26. Artocarpus. {A. oeningensis.) This seems rather a Ficus 

 than an Artocarpus. Unger's Artocarpiditim would seem a very 

 doubtful member of the same order. 



