Records of the Geological Stirveg of India. 
[voL. 
sic European species, and then lie points out that the sum of these relations 
exceeds the connexion which exists between the Damuda flora and that found 
in the Australian beds. But the Australian flora with which comparison is made 
i.s confined to one group of rocks and has been but imperfectly investigated ; 
whilst against the identifications and assimilations with this one poor assemblage 
of plants, consisting of only about twenty fairly known species, there is urged every 
possible connection which can be detected between Damuda plants and those 
fouud in all the various widely exposed floras of Europe between cretaceous and 
permian. Even under these conditions, I doubt if Dr. Feistmantel has proved 
his case. That the Damuda flora has a mesozoic facies is no new discovery; the 
fact has been admitted, I believe, by evoi’y writer on the subjeet, whatever his 
opinions as to the age of the beds, and the same is notoriously the case with the 
Australian Newcastle flora, but I do not think that either the age or homotaxis 
of a group of rocks can be determined by comparing the flora with several distinct 
assemblages of plants of varying age, so well as by showing the connexion with 
the species found in one defined gi’oup. 
Relations of Damuda flora to JEm-opean trias and Australian heds respectively .— 
To show the views I have to answer I make a few extracts from Dr. Feistmantel’s 
later papers, those wi’itton since my own appeared— 
“The affinities of our Damuda flora witli that of the mesozoic epoch and especially of the 
triassic formation ai-e overwhelming. • 
“We have in all the spccisd collections nnmistateablo evidence for the supposition of M. 
llunhury as to the mesozoic, and, as I add, triassic age of the Damuda flora. 
“Already in the old collections from Uaniganj there were proofs enough !” ^ 
[ That is before the discovery of the Karharbari fossils. The remainder of 
the sentence has already been discussed.] 
“ The Damuda flora exhibits itself quite decidedly as mesozoic and most naturally as of triassic 
age. * 
“ We know that the Panchet grouii overlies immediately the Raniganj group, which itself is 
Lower Triassic.'’ 
“ I have also shown that the Damuda are Lower Triassic.” ^ 
And in various tables showing the relations of the Gondwana groups to Euro¬ 
pean strata the Damuda series is always classed by Dr. Feistmantel in accordance 
with his original determination as the equivalent of the Bunter (lower trias).® 
Some Karharbari plants are doubtless allied to Bunter species, and Dr. Feist- 
mantel was perfectly right in including these forms in the Damuda flora, because 
’ Roc. G. S. L, Vol. IX, p. 117. 
= Ih., p. 119. 
3 lb., p. 121. 
'• Roc. G. S. I., Vol, X, p. 28. 
5 Pal. Ind., Ser. 11, 2, p. 160. 
« Roc. G. S. I., Vol. IX, p. 125; Pal. Iiid,, Scr. XI, p, 2; Gcol. Mag. Dec, 2,111,1876, 
p 491. Leon. Gciii. Nencs •Talirb. 1877. p 159, 
