(54 
NiiW HOLLAND IN EUROPE. 
*Ma 
\ 
Reichsanstalt of Yienua, and the Jolianneiun of Griitz, where even a terminal 
hranchlet with several yoiirig leaves is "kept. At present I can give of all these 
a woodcut of onlj the best preserved and rarest form (Fig. 8, «)■ ^^ sliow the 
resemblances and difierences between tlie fossil and living species of Laiirelia^ 
I have given nature-printed illustrations of several. True, the fruits of these 
species did not print well, but the leaves turned out all the better. Laurelia 
Chilensls, Juss. (Fig. 10), and L. serrafa^ Bert. (Fig. 11), both from Chili, must 
be regarded as the nearest allies of L. aromatica, Sprengl. Eut a still closer 
approach to the fossil L. rediviva^ especially as regards the shape and venation 
of the leaves, is presented bj the Chilian X. sempervirens, R. et Pav. {L, ere- 
nata, Popp. (Fig. 12), and L, Nova-Zelandi(s, All. Cunn. (Fig. 13), from iP^ew 
Zealand. But not only in the genus Laurelia, but also in other allied Moni- 
miaceous genera, do we find similar and even more closely corresponding leaves. 
For comparison's sake I will add two leaves of Atheros^perma Sassafras, A. Cunn. 
(^DorypTiora 5'a55rt/ra^,Fudl.),of Xew Holland, one of whieli (Fig. 14, a) shows 
by far the greatest resemblance as regards shape, crenation of the margin, and 
particularly the Tenatlon, the lateral veins being less 
divided before they reach the edge than is the case 
in Laurelia. Thus, in all instances where we succeed 
in finding the proper material for comparing the fossil 
with the existing vegetation, wc see that the two 
never quite agree, but that the fossil species seem to 
stand not only between tlie existing species but also 
the existing genera. It is to be hoped that this sur- 
mise may be con-oborated by future investigations. 
But even at this stage of the inquiry I may be allowed 
to ask, '* Could it be otherwise ?" and do we not re- 
cognize m it an indication of the first and most im- 
portant law of development. 
Uxocarpits :RadoloJana, Ung. (Fig. 15).— E. ramo 
fi-uctifero gracili teretiusculo stricto, foliis raris den- 
ticuliformibus miuutis, pedunculig bilinearibiis erectis 
fruetu longioribus, nucula ovoidea (pressione apice * 
difra?ta) tubo perigonii camoso-incrassato insideute. 
—In scliistomargaceo ad Pudobojum Croatise, 
One of the most remarkable fossils found at Ra- 
doboj, presei-ved at the Geological Eeichsanstalt of 
Vienna. "Without closer comparison and examina- 
tion, one is apt to take it for a raceme with flowers 
having an inferior ovary. However, as the tubular 
pengonium does not quite agree with the elliptical 
ovary» it would seem to be much nearer the truth to 
regard the one as a nut squeezed at the point, and the 
swelling below as a fleshy awqUen peduncle or peri- 
.,.,,. ^ gonuim. A singxdar resemblance is observable in 
the Aiistrahan genus ^socarpns, of which De CandoUe describes 18 arboreous 
or shrubby species, diff^used over New HoDand, Tasmania, New Guinea, 
Fig. 15. 
Fig. 16. 
