1897.] Mr Seward, On the leaves of Bennettites. 277 



is not brought out in the figure. The restoration of Zamites given 

 by Williamson in his well-known paper (PL 53) x accurately 

 represents what I believe to have been the manner of attachment 

 of the inflorescence and foliage leaves to the main stem. 



The above description must necessarily lack completeness in 

 the absence of figures, but it is intended to publish drawings in 

 a monograph on British Cycadean plants now in preparation for 

 the Palasontographical Society. 



The precise relation between Williamsonia, and Bennettites 

 must be left for future discussion, but evidence is not lacking in 

 support of the view that the two genera are both members of the 

 same family, and if not included in one genus they must at least 

 be placed in the same family of Bennettiteae. In the title to this 

 paper I have used the term Bennettites in a wide sense as includ- 

 ing plants of the Bennettitean type, though jjossibly generically 

 distinct. 



The generic name Williamsonia, as expressing a more complete 

 knowledge of the botanical affinity of the fossil than the provisional 

 and comprehensive term Zamites, should be substituted for the 

 latter in the case of Lindley and Hutton's species, Zamites gigas. 



I am indebted to M. Renault for the opportunity of examining 

 the specimens in the Paris Museum and for permission to have 

 some of them photographed. My thanks are due also to Mr 

 Newbitt of Whitby and Mr James Rowntree of Scarborough, for 

 enabling me to examine the interesting examples of Williamsonia 

 and Zamites in the museums of those towns. 



1 Linn. Trans. Vol. xxvi. 1870. 



