442 PROCEEDINGS OP THE ACADEMY OP 



themselves. In such a case as this, of course it is useless to attempt to revive 

 the old name. 



1 spec. " Phytolithus cancellatus." (Steinhauer's type.*) Astercliffs, 

 York. J. P. Wetherill. 



L. r i m o s u m , Sternh. 



1 spec. "L. allied to rimosum." Frenchay. Br. Ins. Coll. No. 199. 

 1 spec. " L. allied to rimosum." England. T. B. Wilson, M. D. 

 1 spec. "L. rimosum." Br. Ins. Coll. No. 198. 



L. ? 



25 spec, of branches, variously labelled, and mostly from Br. Ins. Coll. 



Besides the above, there are quite a number of specimens belonging to the 

 genera Lepidodendron and Sigillaria, with various labels, but which do not 

 possess any specific character. 



Ulodendron. 

 U. parmatum, nobis. 



Phytolithus parmatus, Steinhauer. Amer. Philos. Trans, vol. i. (new series, 

 pi. 7, fig. 1. Not Phyt. parmatus of same author, pi. 6, fig. 1. 



1 spec. "Phytolithus parmatus" (Steinhauer's type). Shelf, near Bradford. 

 J. P. Wetherill. 



Ctclocladia, L. et H. 



C. ?Huttonia, nobis. 



Phytolithus parmatus, Sternb. Am. Phil. Trans, pi. 6, fig. 1. Cyclocladia 

 majus and C. minor of Lind. et Hutt. 



1 spec. "Phyt. parmatus" (Steinhauer's type). Shelf, York. J. P. 

 Wetherill. 



If this genus, as is very probable, should prove to be merely the decorti- 

 cated state of Ulodendron, this plant will be Ulodendron Huttoni , nobis. 



Sigillaria,! Brongt. 



Sub-genus Clatharije, Br. 

 S. o r n a t a , Br. 



2 spec. " S. ornata." Br. Ins. Coll. No. 238. 

 1 spec. "S. serlii, Br. Ins. Coll. No. 240. 



Sub-genus Phitodolepis, Brong. 



S. n o tat a , Wood. 



Phytolithus notatus, Steinhaur. S. elliptica, Br. (_S. notata, Br.) ? 



We have but little hesitation in uniting these forms. If S. notata, Brong., 

 is distinct from /S. elliptica, Brong., it is also distinct from Phytolithus notatus, 

 Steinhauer, which is identical with S. elliptica. The sharp angles and pro- 

 elongations from them, mentioned by Brongniart as characterizing S. notata, 

 Brong., do not exist, either in Steinhauer's figure, or in specimens in pos- 

 session of the Academy, which, in all probability, are Steinhauer's types. 



* Were it not for the possession of this type, we would not, perhaps, be warranted in 

 giving so positively the synonymy of this species ; but having this, we are enabled to 

 deride regarding the points above given. 



t In our classification of this genus we shall follow Goldenburg (Die Pflanzen, des 

 Steinkolen, von Saarbuck, 1857), and reduce the genera indicated by us (Pr. A. JS. S. 

 1860), to the rank of sub-genera. Although we have some hesitation as to the propriety 

 of this, yet it is, perhaps, the better course, as these sub-genera approximate in indefinite- 

 ness to the genus Sigillaria. They have, without doubt, the same value as Syringoden- 

 dron, and, in our opinion, the Sigillaria constitutes an order, and the present sub-genera 

 the genera of it; bu the weight of authority is against this. Under this classification 

 the American forms described by us will stand S. perplexa.S. camptotaenia, 

 & s o 1 a n u s , S. magnifica, S. psilophloeus. 



[Oct. 



