GYMNOSPERJVLE. 



69 





fefe 



The Sheppey specimens are still more fragmentary, and add nothing to our knowledge 

 of the size and external form of the cone, and only one presents a few perfect scales. 

 These are also about two centimetres broad, and 

 with heads resembling those of the Bracklesham 

 specimen (PI. XIII, fig. 9). Other specimens 

 (PI. XIV, figs. 3 and 8) show a very stout axis 

 marked deeply with pear-shaped scars and rather 

 large and winged seeds. The fragment (PI. XIII, 

 fig. 6) from Highcliff doubtless belongs to the 

 same or a very similar species. 



The resemblance between the Bracklesham and 

 the Sheppey and Highcliff specimens, justify, in the 

 absence of any distinguishing specific characters, 

 their being grouped under one name. Whether 

 they should be united with P. BowerbanMi, of 

 Carruthers, is far more open to question, and 

 indeed, if Dixon's figure were an absolutely reliable 

 representation, it would be manifestly improper to 

 do so ; but I know from experience how difficult it 

 is to interpret and restore an imperfect and abraded 

 cone in the condition of soft and perishable lignite, 

 and I think that with our present material the multi- 

 plication of species is best avoided. The late Dr. 



Bowerbank remarked on the difference between Dixon's two specimens from Brackle- 

 sham, but abstained from separating them specifically. 



Carruthers places it in the Cembra division of Strobus, distinguished by its wingless 

 seeds • and Bowerbank considered both the Bracklesham Pines to be allied to the tender 

 P. Russettiana of Mexico. The specimens I have united with it, however, clearly belong 

 to the Pinaster section of the genus. 



It is rare at Bracklesham, but Mr. Keeping tells me that cones are occasionally 

 abundant at Highcliff. It is also very rare at Sheppey, where the presence of seeds in situ 

 shows that the cones were not originally deposited in a mutilated condition. 



Fig. 28. — P. BowerbanMi. ' Dixon's Geology of 

 Sussex,' edit. 2. 



Pinus Plutonis, Baily. Plate XV, figs. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 ; Plate XVI, figs. 5—7, and 

 17 ; Plate XVII, except fig. 4 ; and Plate XVIII. 



Pinus Plutonis, Baily. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, vol. xxv, p. 360, pi. xv, 1869. 

 — Graingeri, Baily. Report of Brit. Association, pi. ii, 1880. 



Basaltic Formation, Ballypalady, Antrim. 



10 



