30 JOURNAL AND PROCEEDINGS. 



Perhaps in no other locality have been found more perfect spe- 

 cimens of Dr. Hall's Buthotrephis, than in our local Clinton rocks. 

 From the conical root buried erect in an indurated limestone shale 

 to the slender branch proceeding from the extremity of the main 

 stem, it is almost as well defined as a specimen in a botanical case. 

 The branches alternate, more robust near the base, and smaller 

 towards the top. If only detached branches were obtained, they 

 would probably be described and figured as distinct species, or at 

 least varieties. It is evident that Dr. Nicholson and others have 

 seen only mere fragments, that they have not made out where the 

 plant bed can be found, where they were deposited ifi situ. In a 

 layer little more than six inches thick I counted seven or eight 

 generations, one lying above the other, with their partings of cal- 

 careous shale between. 



A white colorless lingula (L. oblata) is frequently found in one 

 of the plant beds. There are three or more ; I think they are sit- 

 uated a little above the passage beds overlying the Grey Band of the 

 Medina freestone. There are no indications on the surface that 

 these Clinton flags contain fossils ; an examination of the edges led to 

 the discovery. If you carefully examine this portion you may 

 notice short lines at regular intervals, interspersed through the 

 matrix, differing slightly in color ; note likewise that they appear to 

 be confined to a certain part of the rock. Now if they were the 

 burrows of errant luornis named and figured in the Palaeontology of 

 Ontario under the name Planolites, one would expect them to pre- 

 sent a more or less rounded shape, which they do not. I do not 

 mean to say that Dr. Nicholson makes any mistake regarding the 

 existence of an annelid in the muddy Clinton flats differing from 

 other members of the family, Scolithus, Arenicolites, etc , whose 

 burrows were vertical, not horizontal. The wisdom of this view ad- 

 mits of no dispute ; but he adds, "The genus Planolites includes 

 a large number of supposed vegetable fossils from the Palaeozoic 

 rocks which have been referred to the genera Palteophycus and 



Chondrites They agree doubtless with some of the species 



described [as plants] by Hall and Billings from the Silurian rocks of 

 North America." There, I think, he is quite mistaken. The error, 

 I presume, originated,, as in the former case, from his not having 

 seen proper specimens, or from his being entirely unacquainted with 

 their immediate surroundings. 



