73 
The Carboniferous Flora of the Bristol Coalfield. 
By E. Weruerep, F.G.S., F.C.S. Read at Gloucester, (Winter 
Meeting), November 14th, 1878. 
The Bristol Coalfield has at various times, been described by 
many eminent Geologists but these descriptions have for the 
most part related to Physical conditions of the strata. 
Mr. Sroppart, F.G.8., in his valuable papers on the Bristol 
Coalfield, communicated to the Bristol Naturalists’ Society, has 
touched slightly on the Flora, but with this exception I am not 
aware that it has been in any way described. In fact, the Fossil 
Flora of most coal fields is generally passed over as being of 
little importance; the Fauna has been chiefly collected and 
adopted for the classification of strata or stratigraphical 
purposes. 
* Proressor Hott, in his classification of the Carboniferous 
series, states, that on principle he “ rejected both fish and 
plants as furnishing data for classification.” 
Now, considering that plants as well as animals have their 
range in time also, does it seem reasonable to ignore them ? 
That they should not be, is now contended by several geologists 
of distinction. 
As an instance of the importance of recognising the Fossil 
Flora of any area I would point to the difference of opinion 
which has arisen as to whether the Lignite deposits of Colorado 
belong to the Tertiary or Cretaceous age. In these Lignites, 
Prorrssor Lusqurrrux (“Age of N. American Lignites,” U.S. 
survey of Colorado) describes 250 species of plants which are 
not known in the Cretaceous rocks, associated with a few types 
of Cretaceous Fauna. Now the question is, which shall deter- 
* Quarterly Journal Geological Society, Vol. 33, page 651, 1878. 
G 
