114 
Transactions Texas Academy of Science. 
Fontaine, William Morris. 
'Descrapitio-n of the 'Species. Equlsetaeeae. Equisetum texense, sp. nov. 
Ferns. Sphenopteris valdensis, Heer? Cyeads. Dioonites Buohianus, var. 
rarinervis, vaT. nov., D. Buchianus, 'Schimper. D. Buchianus, var. angus- 
tifoUus, Font. D. Dunkerianus, (iGropp.) Miquel. Podozamites acutifo- 
lius. Font.? Podozamites .species? Zamites tenuinervis, Font. Conifers. 
Ahietites Linkii, (Foem.) Dunk. Laricopsis longifolia, Font. Sphenole- 
pidium Sternbergianum, var. densifolium, Font. Pinus species? Brachy- 
phyllum texense, sp. nov. Pagiophyllum dubium, sp,. nov. Frenelopis 
varians, sp. nov. F. Hoheneggeri (Ett.) Sohenk. Sequoia pagiopliylloides, 
sp. nov. Abietites species? Flants of Uncertain Affinities. Williamsonia 
texana-, sp. nov. Garpolithus obovatus sp. nov. G. Harveyi sp. nov. 
Gyoadeospermum I'otundatum, Font. 
Age and Affinities of the Trinity Flora. 
“The plants found at den Rose show, so far as can be judged from so 
imperfect a colleotion, that the Tidnity flora finds its closest resemblance in 
the older portion of the lower Potomac. There is, however, this important 
difference iNo trace of angiosperihs, even the most archaic, has been 
found in the Texas region. IWe have only the four elements of the typical 
Jurassic flora. This then makes the Trinity flora somewhat older than that 
of the oldest Potomac. 'The absence of the angiospernis and the presence 
of the forms that hre found indicate decidedly that the Trinity flora is not 
younger than the earliest stage of the Cretaceous. The number of plants 
found to 'be identical with certain of those of the oldest Potomac sho^ws 
that there is little difference in the age of the two formations. The plant- 
bearing portion of the Trinity is somewhat older than the basal Potomac 
strata., but the difference in age cannot be great.” Pp. 279-280. 
164. G. 
(Sketch of the Natural Gas Field near Brenham^ Texas. 
Geological and Scientific Bulletin, Yol. I, No. 8. December, 
1888. 
“In the year 1879, Wm. 'Seidell, seeking water for farm purposes, had 
a well bored to a depth of between one hundred and fifty and one hundred 
and sixty feet, when a sand rock was reached, which produced a fine flow 
of natural gas. At that time natural gas was not as pi-ominent as fuel, 
and no attention was paid to the find further than to use it as a play- 
thing and for domestic uses in a tenant house near by. The Hon. J. E. 
Cray, of Brenham, Texas, a former representative of Washington county, 
and a gentleman of fine intelligence, who lived not far from this well, in a 
letter to J. iB. Grilmer & Co., says of -it : 
“ ‘The well was bored in August, 1879, eleven inches in diameter, making 
eight inches after being curbed with wood. When burning, the flame would 
extend fully fifteen feet high. When the gas was confined, and allowed 
to escape through a small hole in the well covering, and a snuff bottle 
placed to it, the noise made by the stream of gas in the bottle resembled 
that of a steam whistle, and was plainly heard a mile or more from the 
well. The force or volume of the well did not perceptibly diminish until 
old sacks, used in extinguishing the flame, dirt, chunks of wood, etc., were 
