Notices of Memoirs—Ettingshausen’s Flora of Sheppey. 37 
As I treat elsewhere ' of the details of the correspondence between 
the various Graptolitic zones of Britain and foreign countries, it will 
be unnecessary for me to go more fully into the subject in this 
place. I trust, however, that the foregoing sketch will make it 
evident how greatly geologists are indebted to the author for the 
wide extent and minute accuracy of his researches, and the cautious 
and conscientious manner in which he has drawn his important and 
far-reaching generalizations. 
(Zo be concluded in our next Number.) 
Potten, Of) MAIwoOtRs. 
Report on THE Fossizn Fiona or Sueppry.? By Dr. Constantin 
Baron Errincsuavusen, Professor in the University of Graz, 
Austria. ’ 
NE of the most important, if not the most important, locality for 
the Eocene Flora of Great Britain, and perhaps of the Tertiary 
formation generally, is the London Clay of the Isle of Sheppey, in 
which are found great numbers of plant remains belonging to many 
different kinds of fossil fruits and seeds. After an examination of 
the rich collection in the British Museum, I feel now sure that we 
possess, in the fruits and seeds of Sheppey, the key to a more precise 
determination of many of the genera and species of fossil plants 
which in other localities are known only by their leaves. 
The literature of the Sheppey fruits is not very extensive ; a detailed 
account of all the works relating to it is published in the Paleeonto- 
graphical Society, 1879, p. 11, Mr. Gardner’s “ Introduction to our 
Monograph on the British Eocene Flora.” The only work on this 
subject with scientific determinations, and which need here be referred 
to, was published in the year 1840 by James Scott Bowerbank, and is 
entitled “‘ A History of the Fossil Fruits and Seeds of the London 
Clay.” He enumerates twelve genera, which are divided by him into 
nine families. The genera are as follows: Nipadites, Hightea, Petro- 
philoides, Cupressinites, Cupanoides, Tricarpellites, Wetherellia, Cucu- 
mites, Faboidea, Leguminosites, Mimosites, Xulinosprionites. Of these 
only one (Nipadites) belongs to the Monocotyledons, and one (Cupres- 
sinites) to the Gymnosperme, while the rest are Dicotyledons. 
I am now able materially to advance the knowledge of this Flora. 
Since my investigation in the course of the winter 1878-9, at the 
British Museum, I have ascertained that the Fossil Flora of Sheppey 
contains, including those above mentioned, at least 72 genera and 
200 species, which may be distributed into 41 families. Of these 
genera one belongs to the Thallophyta, 7 to the Gymnosperme, 18 to 
the Monocotyledons, 43 to the Dicotyledons, and 8 are indeterminable. 
The existence of this Flora and generally of the Eocene Flora of 
Great Britain required, we believe, at least, a sub-tropical climate. This 
1 Lapworth.—Geological Distribution of the Rhabdophora, Annals and Nag. Nat. 
Hist. 1879. 
2 Abstract of the Proceedings of the Royal Society, Nov. 27, 1879. 
