1885.] Geology and Palæontology, 1003 
more than the opercula of Goniatites. Both agree, however, that 
for other forms this explanation is, according to our present 
knowledge, inadmissible. W. Dames, however, asserts that none 
are phyllopodous in their nature, a dogmatic opinion for which 
he is taken to task by the English palæontologist. They are, in 
fact, species of Phyllocarida, and not phyllopods. 
Carboniferous—Since 1878 no less than 1300 specimens of 
fossil insects have been obtained at Commentry, while all other 
localities have only furnished about 120 examples. These Com- 
mentry insects are remarkably well preserved, many of them 
being complete, instead of consisting of the wings only, as is 
often the case with insect remains. M. Ch. Brongniart (Revue 
Scientifique, 29 Aout, 1885) classifies these carboniferous insects 
as Orthoptera, Neurorthoptera, Pseudo-neuroptera, and Hemip- 
tera. Among the Orthoptera are fifty specimens of Dasyleptus 
lucasi, an ancestral Thysanouran, and numerous Palæoblattariæ 
and Palzderidiodea. The Neurorthoptera comprise the order 
of that name and the Palezodictyoptera; the first with the 
families Protophasmida and Sthenaropterida, and the second 
with the families Stenodictyopterida, Hadrobrachypoda, and 
Platypterida. The wings of Archeoptilus lucasi are twenty- 
five to thirty centimeters long, and those of Eugereon and 
other Stenodictyopterida are finely netted like those of 
dragonflies. The Hadrobrachypoda are regarded as ancestral 
Their wings are broad, generally rounded at the end, and 
though morphologically like those of the Protophasmida, 
differ greatly in the nervation. The nerves are well sepa- 
Tated, and the wings colored. Six familes of Pseudo-neurop- 
tera can be distinguished, the Megascopterida, Protodonata, 
Homothetida, and three others containing the ancestral types of 
the Ephemeridz, Perlide, and Ascalaphus. The Hemiptera are 
represented by types of the Fulgoride and Cicadide. 
Cretaceous —Mr. J. S. Gardner denies the synchronism of a 
large part of the American Cretaceous with that of England. 
Whether the former are Cretaceous at all is debatable. The 
question whether a Cretaceous fauna extended into the Eocene, 
Or an Eocene flora extended back to the Cretaceous is answered 
by Mr. Gardner in these words: “ In support of the first propo- 
sition we have the innumerable survivals of old. types at the 
ence of any distinctly Cretaceous plants. I think all the evi- 
dence I have been able to bring forward is in favor of a newer 
rather than an older date, and this is decidedly more in harmony . 
with the march of evolution.” Mr. J. S. Gardner (Quart. Jour. 
