250 H. Hamshaw Thomas. 
Our knowledge of the detailed structure was greatly extended 
by Williamson 1 , who figured and described many specimens in his 
Memoirs. All the preceding authors had unhesitatingly attributed 
Calamostachys to a Catamite stem, but for a long time Williamson 
considered that it was not the cone of a true Catamite, but rather 
allied to AsteropliyUites (Sptienoptiyllum ) or Lepidodendron. This 
conclusion was disputed by Hick 3 in an important contribution. 
He described the cone in detail and drew attention to the layer of 
cells in the bracts, the lumina of which were occupied by dense 
masses of black, carbonaceous substance. He noticed that a tissue 
of this kind was present, both in young stems and leaves of Catamites. 
Finally, in 1894, Williamson and Scott worked through all the 
material again, practically settling the question of the affinities of 
the cone and giving an excellent account of its anatomy. They 
conclude with the following statement: “ In view then of the fact that 
a renewed examination of Calamostachys binneyana has tended to 
show that its anatomy is much more similar to that of Catamites than 
was formerly supposed, while another species of the genus has an 
exactly similar structure, we think that the relation of our British 
species of Calamostachys to Catamites may well have been a close 
one. It is even possible that some of the stems which have been 
described under the general name of Catamites may have been those 
on which Calamostachys fructifications were borne. Beyond this we 
cannot go until further evidence of continuity has been produced 
.The solution of the problem must await further evidence.” 3 
Though in the present specimen I have been unable to get a section 
passing through the stem below the cone, yet the occurrence of 
Catamite leaves which were undoubtedly attached to it, is certainly 
part of the evidence required. 
Description of the Specimens. The material at my disposal 
consists of three slightly oblique, longitudinal sections through the 
cone. One of them (No. 3) only contains a small portion of the 
upper part. The section (No. 1) shown in PI. I., Fig. 1 is nearly 
radial through the base of the cone, becoming tangential above and 
below. The other section (No. 2) is cut tangentially to the cone at 
its base, and shows the axis of the upper portion. 
The length of the cone (Fig. 1) was at least 14 mm., and its 
greatest breadth about 5 mm. It seems to have been cylindrical 
in shape. Eight whorls of fertile appendages and as many sterile 
* Williamson (73), (80), (81), (89). 8 Hick (93). 
8 Williamson and Scott (94), p. 919. 
