Professor A. O. Seward—Fossil Plants from South Africa. 483 
the North Island of New Zealand. The similarity extends to the 
form and arrangement of the petioles and their vascular strands. It 
is noteworthy that with the stem were found imperfectly preserved 
impressions of Cladophlebis denticulata (Brongn.) and C. Browniana 
(Dunk.). I have elsewhere suggested that C. denticulata’ is most 
probably Osmundaceous, and others* have expressed the same opinion. 
Though we have as yet no satisfactory proof of the correctness of this 
view it receives some support from the discovery of the stem which it 
is proposed to name Osmundites Kolber. It is interesting to find that 
a petrified Osmundaceous stem recently described by Messrs. Kidston 
and Gwynne-Vaughan as Osmundites Dunlopi* from Jurassic beds in 
the Otago district, New Zealand, was also found in association with 
impressions of Cladophiebis denticulata. 
“« Rubidgea Mackayt,” Tate [ Glossopteris indica, Schimp. |. 
In Tate’s paper ‘‘On some Secondary Fossils from South Africa”’ 
the following passage occurs:—‘“‘ With the above-mentioned specimens 
[i.e. Glossopteris Browniana, Brongn. | from Bloemkop are some of an 
apparently, at first sight, second species of Glossopterrs ; these do not 
exhibit fructification. Dr. Rubidge has, however, communicated 
a drawing (by Mr. M’Kay) of a specimen of this species obtained 
by Mr. M’Kay from East London, and I find that it presents 
characters generically distinct from those of Glossopteris; for the 
position of the fructification is indicated by a few large elevated 
regions, arising from many veins, and somewhat regularly arranged 
in a row coincident with the margin, and not by numerous spots, 
small in size, supported by one vein, distributed over much of the 
surface of the frond.” * 
The original drawing of the type-specimen of Rubidgea Mackayz, 
reproduced in Tate’s paper, is in the Museum of the Geological Society 
of London, but the actual specimen is not in the collection. The 
portion of leaf shown in the figure closely resembles a Glossopteris 
frond, except in the absence of lateral anastomoses between the 
secondary veins; as Mr. Arber® points out, it is impossible to 
determine the plant accurately without seeing the original specimen. 
The plants sent to me from the South African Museum for 
examination include a few impressions collected by M’Kay from East 
London and labelled by him. On one specimen is written—‘‘ A new 
species of fern named after Dr. Rubidge from G. M’Kay, East 
London.” This is an imperfect impression, 10cm. long, on black 
shale of a fairly broad leaf possessing a distinct midrib, from which 
numerous secondary veins are given off obliquely ; lateral anastomoses 
are frequent and in some parts of the fossil clearly marked. In size 
and in the course of the veins the specimen agrees with the drawing 
of Rubidgea Mackayi reproduced by Tate. The supposed fructification 
cannot be recognised, but there are occasional prominences on the 
1 Tbid., p. 253. 
2 Raciborski, ‘‘ Flora Kopalna’’: Pamietnika Akad. Umiejetnosei, 1894. 
3 Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, vol. xlv, pt. 3 (1907), p. 760. 
4 Tate: Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxiii (1867), p. 141, pl. v, fig. 8. 
> Catalogue of the Fossil Plants of the @lossopteris Flora, 1905, p. 54. 
