INCERTZ SEDIS. 21 
alternating rows. There is certainly a marked resemblance 
between some specimens of fertile branches in members of the 
Lycopodium Phlegmaria group and the Wealden fragment; but the 
nature of the fossil renders it unwise to give expression to this 
resemblance by adopting the name Lycopodites. 
The occurrence of this genus in Wealden rocks has previously 
been hinted by Mantell!; he includes ? Lycopodites in a list of 
fossil plants from Tilgate Forest. 
Nathorst? figures and describes a specimen as ‘undoubtedly 
Lycopodiaceous,”” from a Japanese locality which has afforded a 
flora with a distinct Wealden facies. In Saporta’s recent list of 
plants from the Wealden of Portugal* there are included certain 
species of Lycopodiaceous plants. 
At first sight the specimen suggests, as Mr. Rufford pointed out, 
a moss-like plant. So far as I have been able to determine there 
are no species of true mosses which show any close similarity in 
habit to the fossil, but in the Hepatice there are some forms in 
which the resemblance is distinctly close, ¢.g. the genus Porella. 
A strong argument, however, against adopting such a generic 
term as Jungermannites is the indication of a woody axis, to which 
reference has already been made. 
Finally the possibility must be noted that the real affinities of 
specimen B may eventually prove to be with the Conifere. Cf. 
Pl. I. Fig. 8, with Heer’s figures of Widdringtonites Reichit (Ett.) * 
and Juniperus macilenta (Hr.),° both from the Cretaceous of 
Greenland; also Lesquereux’s figure of Glyptostrobus gracillimus,’ 
Lesqx., another Cretaceous conifer. 
1 Trans. Geol. Soe. ser. ii. vol. iii. 1835, p. 213. 
2 Denkschr. k. Ak. Wiss. math.-nat. Cl. vol. lvii. 1890, p. 50, pl. ii. fig. 3. 
3 Compt. Rend. vol. exili. 1891, p. 249. 
4 Fl. foss. Arct. vol. vii. 1883, pl. lii. fig. 5. 
5 Ibid. vol. vi. 1882, pl. xxxv. fig. 10. 
6 Rep. U.S. Geol. Surv. vol. vi. 1874, pl. i. fig. 11. 
