205 



Cordia Tasmanica (obtained at Risdon.) 



Premna Drummondi (Johnston f. 2, 25, 26.) 



Sapotacites oligoueuris (Johnston f. 1, 30.) 



Sapotacites achrasoides. 



Ceratopetalum Woodii. 



Ceratopetalum prae-arbutoides (Johnston f. 35.) 



Sapindus Tasmanicus. 



Elaeocarpus Bassii (Johnston f. 57, 60; obtained at 

 Beaconsfield.) 



Cassia Flindersi (Johnston f. 13.) 



Phjllites populiformis (Johnston f. 20.) 



Phyllites ficiformis (Johnston f. 11.) 



Phyllites juglandiformis (Johnston f. 28.) 



Phyllites ligustroides (Johnston f. 22.J 



Phyllites pyriformis (Johnston f. 23.) 



Phyllites phaseolites (Johnston f. 4.) 



Phyllites sophorseformis (Johnston f. 9.) 



Phyllites mimosseformis (Johnston f. 31.) 



Carpolithes gaertnerioides (Johnston f. 34 ; obtained from 

 Pipeclay Bluff.) 



Carpolithes Eisdonianus (from Eisdon.) 



From this list it will be observed that Baron Von Etting- 

 shausen refers unhesitatingly fully half the plants, the leaf 

 impressions of which he had from near Hobart before him, to 

 genera of the existing vegetable world ; some, however, he 

 places into genera solely established for the systematic recep- 

 tion of vegetable relics of former ages, while Phyllites also, 

 here as elsewhere, becomes the generic receptacle for fossil 

 leaf — remnants not readily referable to any defined generic 

 group of i^lants, whether living or extinct — whereas Carpolithes 

 serves for keeping together by prevalent palaeontographic 

 usage some fruits of obscure affinity, generally regarded as 

 gymnospermous, but not always congeneric, and sometimes, 

 perhaps, not even co-ordinal. 



Were I to be allowed to offer a suggestion on a subject, 

 which from its very nature must be perplexing, it would be to 

 recommend a preference of new generic names for all such 

 organic remnants as cannot be put with any degree of certainty 

 along with generic forms now living, nor can safely be placed 

 into clearly defined fossil genera, as this would not commit 

 us to fix the exact systematic position of any organism, known 

 only from fragments quite insufficient for that strict generic 

 recognition which, for instance, would be expected from deal- 

 ing with Laurineae, in the sense of living genera of that order, 

 the corresponding exact circumscrijjtion of which for fossils, 

 even if flowers and fruits were always or finally obtained, would 

 ever remain an impossibility. Thus only in such cases would 

 the generic name of living organisms become adopted for 



