Miscelhinrous. iG^ 



December 4th, 1901.— J. J. H. Teall, Esq., M.A., V.P.K.S., 

 rrosideiit, in the Chair. 



The following comraunication was road: — 

 ' On a new Genus belonging to the Lepcrditiadic, from the 

 Cambrian Shales of Malvern.' By Prof. Theodore Thomas Groom, 

 M.A., D.So., F.G.S. 



Forms referred to Bcj/richia have long been known from the 

 Cambrian beds of Scandinavia, Stockingford, and South Wales ; and 

 tlie writer has obtained from the lowest part of the Malvern Black 

 Shales a species identical with the Stockingford form, which had 

 been provisionally ideiititied with tlie Swedish Bei/richla AajeUni. 

 The characters of these specimens serve to separate the species 

 from those now placed under the genus Bei/richla, a conclusion in 

 which I'rof. T. Rupert Jones concurs. The specimens were obtained 

 from Black Shales at the northern extremity of Chase End ]IilI, 

 associated with Acrolreta, Ar/noslus, Kuionjiaa pimlla, and Prolo- 

 spoitgit fenestraia. The shales are nowhere actually exposed, and 

 can only be reached by excavation. The specimens are frequentl}- 

 crushed and indented. The new genus appears to be most nearly 

 related to those provided with broad lobes, such as Khedeaia, 

 Bt'i/richi'i, CtcnohoJ'ina, and Tetrade.lla. Specimens obtained by 

 Prof. Lapworth from the Oldbury Shales below the zone of 

 SphiTrophthahnus alatas are also referred to the same genus and 

 species. From Linnarsson's description of Bei/richia Amjelini it 

 would seem that this form may be related to the now genus, but it 

 clearly belongs to a different species. 



MISCELLANEOUS. 



Observations on the Flowering of Lobelia cardinalis and Lobelia 

 syphilitica. By Thomas Meehan. 

 In my garden during tlie past year, 1900, I had some fifty plajits 

 each of Lobelia si/philitica and Lobelia cardinalis in rows side b}' 

 side. They were so near each other that some of the flower-stems 

 of the latter fell over and seemed to be blooming among the plants 

 of the former. It surprised me one day to note that while numer- 

 ous winged insects visited the blue-flowered species, none cared for 

 the scarlet ones. This excited an interest that led to a continuous 

 observation through the whole flowering-period. At no time did I 

 see an insect-visitor on the cardinal flower, while every day the 

 blue-flowered species had al)undant attention. On one occasion I 

 found a humming-bird, TrochUas cohibris, at work on the cardinal 

 flower, and the zest with which numerous flowers were examined by 

 the bird attested to the presence of nectar, a fact whicli my own 

 test subseciuently verified. The bird is not numerous on my ground, 

 and with an abundance of flowers of various kinds over many acres 

 of ground, it may be inferred that it was not a frequent visitor to 

 the cardinal flower. I observed it only on this occasion. It wholly 

 neglected the bluc-llowered species, that seemed so attractive to 

 the insects. Toward the end of the season the foreman in charge, 

 Mr. Hemming, captured specimens of all that were visitors to 



Ann.d- Mafj. N. Hist. Sor. 7. Vol. ix. 32 



