216 Note on the Rev, Mr. darkens " Remarks'' S^c. 



of plants are Jurassic also, and botli formations are equally 

 mesozoic, and not palaeozoic, as would be requisite to help 

 Mr. Clarke's argument. 



3rd. I am glad to see that, as I supposed, Mr. Oldham's 

 observations are not so opposed to those of every one else as 

 they at first seemed, and there is nothing in his remarks now 

 quoted, confirmatory of Mr. Clarke's belief of the GlossojJteris 

 and Vertebraria beds being palaeozoic. I do not feel called 

 upon to give here any account of the labors of geologists among 

 the mesozoic rocks of India, containing lower oolitic shells 

 and plants; but neither they nor I referred to Cutch, and the 

 question to be settled was whether the New South Wales 

 Glossopteris beds were palaeozoic or not. 



4th. As to Morris's saying the African '' Dicynodon beds" 

 with Glossopteris may be either triassic or Jurassic, I have 

 only to repeat that both these are of the mesozoic age, for 

 which I contend, and neither of them of the palaeozoic age, 

 for which Mr. Clarke contends. 



5th. I did not " assail" Mr. Clarke for his quotation from 

 Jukes' Manual, but I gave him a number of others from the 

 same book, to show that the one he used was wrong ; but now 

 that Mr. Clarke says that he was aware of all these references, 

 he does not explain how it was he came to recommend to the 

 notice of this Society the single incorrect one, which he now 

 shows he was fully aware only seemed to favor his side of the 

 argument by the accidental error of the compiler. 



6th. I did not accuse Mr. Clarke of misquoting Phillips' 

 Geology of Yorkshire. I quoted a figure in it, and he wrote 

 to deny its existence. I then laid the work with figure on 

 the table, for the inspection of members, but bowed, of course, 

 to the Rev. Mr. Clarke's positive assertion that that to which 

 I referred had no existence. His remarks on the synonomy 

 show that he has not had time nor opportunity to acquaint 

 himself with the literature of the subject. A little study will, 

 I have no doubt, enable him to perceive that what is now 

 called Taniopteris vittata, Avas first figured by Phillips 

 under another name, not used by subsequent writers for his 

 plant. 



7th. I should have said that Mr. Dana published (instead 

 of ffot) several more fossils beyond those known to me or pre- 

 vious writers, after I had published my paper " On the Zo- 

 ology and Botany of the Rocks associated with the Coal-fields 

 of Australia," without altenng my views. A reference to 

 Dana's papers on the subject, in Selliman's American Journal 



