6 
from the Western Port Coal-field, by McCoy* * * § in person ; both from Cape 
Patterson and Bellarine by the same observer! ; and lastly, from the Albert 
River by Mr. James Stirling,! who places the plant in the Coniferte, and 
tnakes some curious remarks on it. 
Loc. —Kilcunda district. 
Baiera subgracilis, McCoy. 
(Nos. 277, 293, 377, 380, 437, 450, 453, 457, 458, 460, 462, 464, 470.) 
Obs. —In 1892 Mr. James Stirling published § this MS. name of 
McCoy, with a figure only of a specimen from Korumburra, Gippsland,' 
and again additional figures in 1900,|| with the following remarks :—“ This 
elegant species has in many respects a striking resemblance to the Ginko 
Simmondsi of Shirley, which occurs along with a Tceniopteris in the 
Ipswich beds of Queensland, except that the linear segments are broader, 
and the nerves more pronounced in the Victorian species/’ 
Valid grounds for the separation of the Victorian and Queensland plants 
do not appear to me to exist—the breadth of the linear leaf-segments is 
merely a question of growth, and the pronunciation of the nerves one of 
preservation. As Mr. Shirley’s namef was accompanied by both detailed 
description and figure, it must .take precedence of Professor McCoy’s. 
Further, however, I am of opinion that Baiera subgracilis , McCoy, and 
Ginkgo Simmondsi , Shirley, are both synonymous with Jeanpaulia 
palmata , Ratte,** * * §§ anterior in date of publication to either. To render this 
clear, I may further add that I regard Shirley’s species not as a Ginkgo , but 
a Baiera , and that Jeanpaidia, the generic name made use of by the late 
Mr. Ratte, is simply a synonym of Baiera J f A further complication arises 
from the fact that the specific name given by Ratte was preoccupied, as ex¬ 
plained by Dr. 0. Feistmantel,!! who proposed in the place of the latter 
that of Baiera flaJelliformis , and this is the name I believe the Victorian 
plant should bear. 
Associated with the foregoing plant amongst the specimens from the 
parish of Kongwak and Outtrim bridge, a few other specimens (No. 279, 
&c.) are proportionately so much more delicate that I felt inclined to refer 
them to Baiera bidens , Ten. Woods,§§ but further consideration has led me 
to regard them as younger individuals of the same species— B. flabelli - 
formis. 
Throughout the collection from the parish of Kongwak occur numerous 
ovate, elliptical, or very slightly pyriform and more or less flattened bodies 
(Nos. 348, 408, 418, 422, 435, 440, 446, 455, 468), which, I think, are with¬ 
out doubt the seeds of Baiera. Each seed has a small flattened flange-like 
border, but only in one instance is the peduncle preserved. These bodies 
vary in size from 6 to 11 millimetres in length, and bear a very close 
resemblance to the seeds of B. munsteriana , Schenk, sp.|||| It is quite 
legitimate to suppose that these are the seeds of B. subaracilis , 
McCoy. 
* McCoy, Report of the Western Port Coal Commission, 1871-72, p. 6. 
t McCoy, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 1867, XX., p. 196. 
X Stirling, Dept. Mines Viet., Reports on Victorian Coal-fields, 1900, No, 7, p. 6. 
§ Ibid. 1892, p. 12, t. 2, f. 13. 
|| Ibid. 1900, No. 7, p. 5, t. 1, f. 4-7a. 
Shirley, Bull. Geol. Survey Queensland, 1898, No. 7, p. 12, t. 2. 
** Ratte, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S. Wales, 1887, I (2), pt. 4, p. 1078, t. 17. 
ft Saporta, Pal. Frang. Veg. Terr. Jurassique, iii., p. 270. 
+t Feistmantel, Geol. Survey New South Wales, Pal. Mem., No. 3, 1890, p. 158. 
§§ Tenison Woods, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1883, viii., pt. 1, p. 132, t. 4, f. 3. 
IHI Saporta, Pal. Franc. V6g. Terr. Jurassique, iii., t. 28, f. 5-6d, 
