THE PRESENT POSITION OF PALEOZOIC BOTANY. 
Bye) Ey SCOnr aH was. 
Lately Honorary Keeper of the Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, 
Kew. 
Since the general acceptance of the doctrine of evolution, the 
determination of the course of descent has become the ultimate 
object of the scientific systematist; the problem is an historical one 
and the most authentic documents are the remains of the ancient 
organisms preserved in the rocks. Remote and even unattainable 
as a full solution of the problem must be, we may confidently hope, 
in tracing something of the past history of plants, to throw new 
hight on their relationships. 
There is probably no branch of botany which has made more 
rapid advances of late years than the study of fossil plants, and it 
is especially the investigation of the more ancient floras which is 
now leading to new results of far-reaching significance. The object 
of the present article is to give a sketch of our knowledge of Paleo- 
zoic plants and their affinities, as affected by recent discoveries. 
a Abridged and condensed, with the consent of the author, from Progressus 
Rei Botanic, vol. 1, pt. 1, pp. 139-217, 387 figures; Leiden, 1907, Gustav 
Fischer. 
The discoveries among Paleozoic plant fossils have been so rapid during 
the last decade, and the light thrown on the nature of the ancient extinct types, 
their mutual relations, and their part in the systematic evolution of the great 
groups of living plants, has been so important, as well as brilliant, as to excite 
the interest of students in all branches of botany in-all countries. In the par- 
tial reformation of Paleozoic botany, and in the task of working out the phy- 
logeny of our lower gymnosperms, in particular, the distinguished author has 
played the leading roéle among living investigators. 
To meet the call for information on the part of American readers this very 
able, comprehensive, authoritative, and fairly conservative article is printed 
as fully as space will permit, even including as much as possible of the technical 
matter, since these widely scattered data have nowhere been assembled in our 
American literature. 
For references to the many papers cited, and for additional illustrations, 
the reader is referred to the original article and to Mr. Arber’s bibliography in 
the Progressus Rei Botanic. 
Byel 
