21 



It may not be out of place before concluding to refer to 

 the published accounts of Australian Belemnites ; tbe litera- 

 ture of the subject is not large. 



Amongst the fossils obtained by Mr. P. Gordon on the 

 Fitzroy Downs, and forwarded to Professor McCoy through 

 the Eev. W. B. Clarke, was a Belemnite, presumed to be un- 

 described, and allied to B. giganteus, and which the latter 

 desired might be called Belemnites BarMiji, in honour of Sir 

 Henry Barkly, the then popular Governor of Victoria.^ So 

 far as I know it has not been described, and the name remains 

 a MS. one. 



The second reference we have to another individual of this 

 group in Australian rocks is that by Professor McCoy, who 

 described a species of the subgenus Belemnitella, under the 

 name of B. diptycha, from the Cretaceous rocks at the head of 

 the Flinders Eiver in Northern Queensland.'" 



In Mr. Charles Moore's interesting paj)er on '' Australian 

 Mesozoic Geology and Palaeontology," the late Professor 

 Phillips, F.E.S., described a well-marked species of Belemnite, 

 as Belemnites australis'' The specimen, of which the guard 

 was the only portion preserved, was from the Upper Maranoa 

 Eiver District, and was considered by its describer to be most 

 nearly allied to B. hastatus (Blainville), which is found in the 

 Oxford clay of England. Another specimen appeared to be 

 like B. sulcatus (Miller), also of the Oxford clay. In addition 

 to these two several other fragments are either noticed or 

 described in the same paper, one an individual with the 

 "phragmocone " in position appears to be most nearly allied 

 to B. jpaxillos2is (Schlotheim), and is from Wollumbilla. The 

 second specimen was considered by Mr. Moore to be B. 

 canaliculatus (Schlotheim). 



A tertiary species of Belemnite has been described from 

 the South Australian rocks," but as this is without the scope 

 of this communication it need not be referred to here, except 

 to point out that Professor McCoy has suggested," that the 

 remains so described may perhaps be those of a Pennatulid 

 zoophyte allied to his Graphularia Bohince from the Miocene 

 beds of the Geelong district. 



9. Quar. Jour. Geol. Soc, 1862. sviii., p. 246. 10. i\nnals and Mag. 

 Nat. Hist., 1867. xix., p. 356. Trans. K. Soc. Vic, 1868. viii., p. 42. 



11. Quart. Jour. Geol. Soc, 1870, xsvi., p. 258. 12. Ibid, 1877, sxsiii. p. 

 257. 13. Prodromus Par., Victoria, dec 5, p. 33. 



