5.—NOTES ON THE FOSSIL FLORA OF BERWICK.* 
(By Henry Deane , M.A, F.L.S .) 
(Specimens 77-141, 228-283.) 
A large number of the leaves from these deposits have all the appearance 
of eucalypts, and that they belong to the genus Eucalyptus as we know it, 
and not merely to some ancestral form, is highly probable. I pointed out 
with regard to E. prcecoriacea ,‘ from the Mornington deposits, that that 
species p ossesse( i a type of venation corresponding with E. coriacea , 
A. Cunn. (E. pauciflora , Sieber), second in the series given in the late Baron 
yon Mueller’s Census.f This latter species and E. stellulata , Sieber, have 
parallel veins, while the rest of the group of Iienantherece have veins 
forming a more or less acute angle with the midrib. Towards the end of the 
whole series which terminates with the Parallelantlierece the lateral veins are 
more transverse. Some of the fossil leaves possess this latter character, 
while some are intermediate in the angle they form with the midrib. I think 
it is now clear that nearly all the varieties of venation displayed by the 
living genus were to be found in the early Cainozoic, so that perhaps it 
may fairly be concluded that the other characters of the genus had been 
differentiated. 
The naming of fossil eucalypt leaves is a difficult task, and in the end the 
names can be only conventional. Each name is applied to a particular form 
of leaf, but that form may have been common to several species, as is often 
found to be the case at the present day. It must be borne in mind, there¬ 
fore, that we are not dealing with species determined after the examination 
of a series of botanical characters, but only with differences in leaf form and 
venation. Leaves may be thought to be identical that really belong to quite 
different species, and, perhaps, to other genera and natural orders. It would 
be far preferable, except in cases where all probability of doubt is removed, 
to adopt some nomenclature by which it would be understood that the leaf 
and leaf only is the guide. In the present case a new compound 
name might be suggested. As, however, Professor McCoy, Baron 
Ettingsliausen, and Mr. R. M. Johnston have already referred Australian 
and Tasmanian fossil leaves to the living genus, and as the probability of 
the existence of Eucalypts in the early Cainozoic is, as already explained, 
exceedingly great, I feel that it would be pedantic on my part to adopt any 
other method than that used bv those authorities. Similar remarks would 
«/ 
be applicable with reference to other genera, such as Fagus , Lomatia , &c. 
Besides the above typical Australian forms there are others also occurring 
in these deposits which appear to be eminently Australian in character. 
There are many leaves which seem to be only referable to Proteacece , and 
some of these very much resemble certain species of Lomatia , identified as 
such by Baron Ettingsliausen in his Contributions to the Tertiary Flora of 
Australia. The southern Fagus seems also to be represented, as well as 
Mollinedia , Daphnandra , and some others which are present in the vegetation 
of south-eastern Australia at the present dav. There is no necessitv to 
search among the floras of other parts of the world for the affinities of 
these Berwick fossils. This is a very interesting fact, as it seems to show 
that at the time these deposits were laid down, the flora of the district from 
which the leaves were derived was as typically Australian as that of any 
district at the present day. 
* A. E. Kitson, Report on the Rapid Survey of an Area in the Berwick-Cranbourne 
District.—Rec. Geol. Surv. Viet., I, Pt. 1, 1902. 
t Deane, Notes on the Fossil Flora of Pitfield and Mornington. Ibid. 
