FOSSIL FLORA OF ALASKA. 575 



In 1871 Eichwald* made a reexamination of the plants collected by Lientenant 

 von Doroshin that had first been stndied, as above pointed out, by Goppert in 

 1861. Goppert; it will be remembered, did not give figures or descriptions of these 

 plants in his paper. These were supplied by Eichwald, who also made use of 

 Heer's Flora FossUis Alaskaaa in working over the collection. He enumerated 9 

 species, 3 of which were newly named, although they had been recognized by 

 Goppert or Heer. Eichwald also gave a list of the species reported from all parts 

 of Alaska by Heer. 



In 1882 Lesquereux published a paper entitled " Contributions to the Miocene 

 Flora of Alaska," t which was based on material brought back by Dr William H. 

 Dall, then of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey. The plants, which 

 according to Lesquereux were finely preserved, came fuom Coal Harbor, Unga 

 island ; Kachemak bay, % Cook inlet ; and Chignik bay, Alaskan j^eninsula (lati" 

 tude 562°). It enumerated twenty-one species of which seven were regarded as 

 new to science. This paper was republished, without the illustrations, in Lesque- 

 reux's ''Cretaceous and Tertiary Floras," as one of the reports of the Hayden 

 survey. § 



Also in 1882, Dr J. S. Xewberry described new species of fossil plants from 

 Alaska in his paper entitled " Brief Descriptions of Fossil Plants, chiefly Tertiary, 

 from western North America." || They were collected by Captain Howard, United 

 States Navy, in Cook inlet and Admiralty inlet,^ and by the United States Steamer 

 Saginaw, in Kootznahoo archipelago (latitude 57° 35''; longitude 134° 19'), the 

 last on February 18, 1869. 



The figures illustrating the foregoing collection of plants were prepared and 

 the plates were engraved and printed in 1871, but have not yet been formally 

 issued. They were designed to form the illustrations of a monograph of the Hay- 

 den survey for which the text was never supplied. A posthumous work, which 

 will embrace these plates, is in preparation by Dr Newberry's successor in Col- 

 umbia College, Dr Arthur HoUick. They are quoted in the present paper as 

 "Plates." 



In 1887 L3.5quereux published a paper entitled " List of recently identified Fossil 

 Plants belonging to the United States National Museum, with descriptions of sev- 

 eral new Species." ** This comprised a large amount of material that had been 

 accunmlating in the department of fossil plants since tlie founding of the Smith- 

 sonian Institution. Among them were a few species recorded as having been col- 

 lected in the vicinity of Sitka by E. W. Nelson, ft and at cape Lisburn by H. D. 

 Woolfe. The specimens from the latter place appear to have been a part of the 

 collection tliat was described from the same locality in the following year, they 

 liaving been accidentally separated. 



*(Teogaostiseh-Paljeontologische Bemerknngen iiher die Halbinsel Mangischlak uud die-Aleu- 

 tisclien Insein; Saint Petersburg, 1871, pp. 107-llG, pi. iv. 



tProc. U. S. Nat. Mas., vol. v, 1882 (188 5), PP- 41:5-149, pi. vi-x. 



J Often called Cliugacliik bay, and so written by Le-^quereux. 



i Vol. viii, 1883, pp. 257-263. 



li Proe. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. v, 18S2 (1883), pp. 502-514. 



^This is presumably an error for Admiralty island, there being no inlet bearing the mime Ad- 

 miralty known in Alaska. 



»* Proe. U. S Nat. Mus., vol. x, 1887, pp. 21-4G, pi. i-iv. 



tt I iinfi informed by Mr. Nelson that he never vi-tited Sitka and did not bring back any fossil 

 plants from Alaska. This throws doubt on the specimens so recorded, and their locality and col- 

 lector remain unknown. 1 have retained them, howevei', as recorded by Lesquereux. 



