196 THE AMERICAN NATURALIST [Vor. XL 
At about this same time Dr. J. S. Newberry was engaged in the 
investigation of the Cretaceous flora,of New Jersey, the results o 
which were later included in his “Flora of the Amboy Clays.” ! 
In this work he lists Dammara borealis Heer as a characteristic 
and abundant element of the flora, and says (pp. 46, 47): ‘In his 
Flora Fossilis Arctica (loc. cit.) Professor Heer describes and fig- 
ures the scales of a conifer which very much resemble those of 
Dammara australis, and yet there are some reasons for doubting 
the accuracy of his reference. It may also be said that the fruit 
scales which he calls Eucalyptus Geinitzi....are without doubt 
generically the same.... the fruits figured by Heer under the 
name of Eucalyptus are plainly scales, and are parts of an imbri- 
cated cone. I say this with confidence, because it has happened 
that in the Amboy clays we have found numbers of them some- 
times associated together, oftener scattered and showing both faces. 
A peculiarity of these scales is that they are striped longitudinally 
by clefts which are filled with an amber-like substance. This 
structure is plainly seen in those figured by Professor Heer on PI. 
XLV. Similar scales are described in an article by Mr. David 
White on the fossil plants from Gay Head.... 
“The considerations which have led me to doubt whether these 
cone scales are those of Dammara are that we have found no 
Dammara-like leaves associated with them, whereas in New - 
Jersey they occur in great numbers mingled with and sometimes 
apparently attached to the branchlets of an extremely delicate 
conifer much like Heer’s Juniperus macilenta.... Almost no 
other plant except this conifer is found with the cone scales, and 
it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that they belong together. 
Another reason for doubting whether these are the scales of a 
Dammara is that in some of them traces of two seeds are appar- 
ently visible, while in Dammara there is but one seed under each 
ee 
The discussion is further continued by Dr. Newberry under his 
* Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. 26, 1895. 
? This observation by Dr. Newberry is particularly interesting in the light 
of what we now know in regard to the Kreischerville specimens, as may be 
appreciated by referring to our description of the seed scars on those scales, 
on p. 199. 
