OLDER POTOMAC OF VIRCJLXIA AND .MAKVLAND. 4iH) 



locality al \ho time of its discovoiy, on Doconihor 5, 1892, is a good 

 example of this plant and occurs in counterparts. This is the one 

 shown in PI. CX, V\ti. 2. The othei- specimens from this locality \v(M-e 

 (•oll(>cted on May 14, 1S9.S. Of those from the Mount \'ernon localit\- 1 

 ii'ood specimen was o!)tained on the occasion of its discovery hv Pi'ofessoi- 

 W'ai'd, on October Ki, 1892, 8 on the next visit, November G, 1892, includ- 

 ing;; tlie one representcMJ in Fie;. .';!, and '.] on May 11, 1893, includini!; that 

 shown in Fiji. 4. 



POPULOPHYLLUM MINCTl.M \Vai(l 11. .sp. ' 



PI. (Til, Fi.u-. It. 



Professor Ward has, on the lalx'l accompanyin<i it, compared one 

 small specimen from the Mount Vernon locality with Velenovsky's 

 Cissilcs cn'spus. The leaf resembles Pojnilitx /xiloNuiceiisis in shape and 

 size, l)ut the ner\-es are different. The specimen was collected on Xovem- 

 l)er (), 1892, and occupies the opposite side of the most complete counter- 

 part of Celastrnpln/lluin Britt())iiantan treated above. 



PopuLus AUKicuLATA Ward. 



Pi. OX, Fig. .5. 



1 SO."). Populus auriculntn Ward : The Potomac Formation (Fifteenth Ann. Rep. U. S. 

 Geol. Surv.. lsn3-94), p. :^ofi, ]>1. iv, fi<.-. 4. 



This species was fii'st found Ijy Professor Ward, and was descriljed 

 \>y iiim. The form given in Fig. 4 of his paper is one of the best 



» Professor Fontaine returned this specimen witliout description with the request that I descrilje it. It 

 has tlie following character: 



Leaf nearly circular in outline, very small, about 16 miu. in length and bieadth, coarsely dentate except 

 near the base ; nervation somewhat palmate, but central nerve much stronger than the four lateral ones that 

 proceed from the summit of the petiole, these latter forking and anastomosing some distance from the margin 

 and giving off fine nervilles that cross the meshes irregularly. 



The nervation of this little leaf is in some respects similar to that of the Vitacea?, but there are featuies 

 that recall Populus. It may represent a small form of that genus. It can not, however, be referred to either 

 of the .species of Populus from the Mount Vernon clays, and is a new species. I place it for the present in the 

 extinct genus Populopbyllum, its nearest affinities being perhaps with P. reniforme Font. 



The note that I made on the label at the time I studied this collection is as follows: "This leaf is a 

 Ci-ssites near C. cnspus, probably the same as that figured by Doctor Newberry (Flora of the Amboy Clavs, 

 pi. .\lii, figs. 20-23), but not identical with Velenovsky's species." I liave not seen the Amboy clay speci- 

 mens, much less the specimen figured by Velenovsky, but judging from the figures on second inspection I 

 would now recede from the statement in my note. The type of C. crixpus from the Cenomanian (CbloMK'ker 

 Sandstein) of Bc'ihm-Leipa in Bohemia (.see Velenovsky, Die Flora der bCiluniscben Kreideformafion, Pt. I\', 

 p. 12, pi. iv, fig. G; Beitriige z. Paliiontologie Osterreich-Ungarns, Vol. V, Heft I, p. 7.3, pi. .\xvii, fig, (i) is a 

 very different thing from Doctor Newberry's plant. My specimen is nearest to his fig. 20. It also resembles 

 his fig. 22, but that is much smaller. His figs. 21 and 23 are not only dill'erent specifically from these, but 

 also from each other. 1 do not think that Dnctcir .Xcwbcrry's plant is a Cissites. — L. F. W. 



