106 
when polished, proved to he more reflective (at least 1 
thought so) than speculum metal. The two objects which 
I sought were — first to have a polished surface unattackable 
by sulphuretted hydrogen (this, for example, is not injured 
by packing with lucifer matches), and secondly, for large 
specula, doing most of the work by the turning-tool and 
lathe. I really think a large, say 8 feet, mirror, coated with 
nickel, but cast of iron, and finished mostly in the lathe, 
while it would not cost the tenth of a similar sized specu- 
lum metal, would be almost equal to silvered glass of 
the same size, and vastly more enduring as to polish. 
Professor Williamson, F.R.S., referring to Mr. Binney’s 
remarks at the meeting of March 4th, said that Mr. Binney, 
after pointing out that I had identified a certain type of 
stem-structure with Asterophyllites, and that Professor 
Renault had discovered the same structure in Sphenophyl- 
lum, Mr, Binney proceeds to say, “ I am not in possession 
of the facts from which the two learned professors came to 
such different conclusions, but I am inclined to consider the 
singular little stem as belonging to a new genus until the 
leaves of Sphenophyllum or Asterophyllites a, re found 
attached to it When this comes to pass of course there can 
be no doubt of the matter/’ I have italicised the two 
important points in the preceding quotation. In the first 
place I cannot understand how Mr. Binney has overlooked 
my statement, made primarily in the Proceedings of the 
Royal Society, and repeated in the last number of the Pro- 
ceedings of your meeting of February 4th, that I had “ got 
a number of exquisite examples showing not only the nodes, 
but verticils of the linear leaves so characteristic of the 
plant ” These leaves I have obtained attached to the stems 
in question in at least a dozen examples. Secondly, Mr. 
Binney considers that my conclusions and those of my 
friend Professor Renault are different , whereas they mutually 
