1897.] NEW YORK ACADEMY OP SCIENCES. 131 



Ann. N. Y. Lye. Nat. Hist. IX. (April, 1868) 19 ; Illiist. Cret. 

 and Tert, Plants, pi. i. figs. 2, 3, as " S. cuneata Newb." 



S. proteeefolia var. lanceolata Lesq, Fl. Dak. Grr. 50, pi. Ixiv. 

 figs. 6-8. 



These leaves appear to be identical with species figured under 

 the above names, especially with fig. 6, pi. Ixiv. Fl. Dak. Gr. 



Dr. Knowlton,in the latter work, refers the species to S. cuneata 

 Newb. (I.e.), so named in lUust. Cret. and Tert. Plants (l. c ), 

 which has been ascertained to be S. Meekii Newb., according to 

 the type specimens in the Geological Museum of Columbia Uni- 

 versity. 



QUERCUS MORRISONIANA Lcsq. 



(PI. xiii. figs 11, 12.) 



Quercus Morrisoniana Lesq. Cret. and Tert. Fl. 40, pi. xvii. 

 figs. 1,2. 



Quercus (?) Nov^-C^sare^ n. sp. 



(PI. xiii. figs. 9, 10.) 



Leaves 2% in. long by | in. wide in middle, oblong to ovate- lanceolate, en- 

 tire, occasionally slightly undulate, narrowed at base ; midrib slightly 

 flexuous ; secondary nervation oblique, sub-parallel for a short distance, then 

 curving and extending upward along the margins, finally becoming anas- 

 tomosed or connected by tine tertiary nervation. 



The leaves resemble in a general way the species described 

 and figured as Q. Myrtillus Heer, in Fl. Foss. Arct. vii. 25, pi., 

 Ivi. figs. 12 b, 17-20. The absence of well defined nervation 

 however in these figures, renders accurate comparison with ours 

 impossible. 



Velenovsky describes and figures leaves, under the name Dios- 

 pyros provecta, in Fl. Boehm, Kreidef. 2 [49], pi. viii. [xxiii.], 

 figs. 1-5, 10, which closely resemble ours, but a reference to 

 Quercus would seem to me more close, and as the identity is 

 not clearly established it has appeared to me safer to give our 

 specimens a new specific name under the genus Quercus. 



Quercus (?) sp. ? 



(PI. xiv. fig. 9.) 



This fragment is evidently part of a strongly nerved leaf, 

 whose secondaries are regularly disposed and sub-parallel. It 

 might be compared with Q. poranioides Lesq. Cret, Fl. 66, pi. 

 XXX., fig. 9, or with Q. Thulensis Heer, Fl. Foss. Arct. vi. Abth. 

 ii. 69, pi. XX vi. fig. 7. I have also thought that it might be a 

 portion of such a leaf as Ilex Masoni Lesq. Fl. Dak. Gr. 179, pi. 



