THE WEALDKN FLOKA. 233 



that this fossil may have some affinity to the seed-like bodies which 

 have been described under the name of Ooltthes sphcericiis, 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 Cycculea;, and at p. 222 repre- 

 senting Cunifenr, but he suggests that one may give " expression to 

 any bias towards one or other group of plants by adding the word 

 CycadccE or Conifercr. 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 Cycadea; 

 are first Withamia, 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, Becldesia, 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. Soimsi 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. Paiffordi 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 T/ndtes, based on a " single specimen 

 of a leafy twig"; a species of Payiophyllum, two species of Bracliy- 

 phyKum (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 

 palseo-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 



