Page:Journal of botany, British and foreign, Volume 34 (1896).djvu/254

232 THE WEALDEN FLORA. '« = " signify ? and wby — as Mr. Beeby tells us is our duty — should we be *' very grateful to Mr. Dyer for his pronouncement," which is manifestly inaccurate, if typography and signs mean anything ? In the absence of any explanation, the statement '* ericetorum = sylvestris" can only mean what Mr. Druce says it means. That such explanation is nowhere given in the Index Kewe^isis is no fault of Mr. Jackson ; and those who are responsible for the suppression of the necessary introduction have, as we have before said, done their best to minimize the usefulness of the work. Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants of the Department of Geology, British Museum (Natural History). The Wealden Flora. Sec. II. — Gymnospermese. By A. C. Seward, M.A., F.G.S., University Lecturer in Botany, Cambridge. London, 1895. 8vo, pp. 259, tt. 20. Price 15s. The author completes his account of the Wealden Flora as represented in the rich collections of the British Museum, which were lately so greatly extended by the purchase of the series collected by Mr. Eufford, of Hastings. The first part of the work, published a little more than a year ago, was noticed in detail in these pages (1894, p. 282). It dealt with the Cryptogamic plants, and the Flora is now completed by the descriptions of the Gymno- sperms. No specimens have been seen that can be referred to Angiosperms. Mr. Seward describes eighteen species of Cycadacea, of which five are new ; ten species of Conifera, of which five are new ; and two new genera, each with a single species ; making thirty species in all. The Cycadean remains are grouped as leaves, scales, fruits, flowers, and trunks. He records ten species based on leaves ; two of these are placed in Cycadites, one being new, though the points of distinction between it and C. Roemeri are somewhat unsatisfactory. " In view of the exceptionally large size of the Ecclesbourne speci- mens, and the satisfactory manner of preservation, it is better to adopt a new specific term." And then in reference to another species from Portugal described by Saporta, he says, '* The figures of the frond fragments show a very distinct resemblance to the English specimens which I have referred to the new species C. Saporta. Possibly the Portuguese and British plants should be placed in one species, but, for the present at least," they are kept separate, because ** in the English fronds the pinnae are somewhat stouter, the tips more sharply acuminate, and the general habit of the leaf appears to be rather stiffer than in C. tenidsectiis.*' Two species of Dioonites are described, a Nilssonia, two belonging to Otozamites (of which one is new), and one to Anomozamites. Two forms of scales are figured, one spear-shaped, the other broad, and wisely no specific names are introduced for them. A fruit believed to be Cycadean is figured and described, but not named. For flowers there is a very singular fossil described as Androstrobus Nathorsti, the surface of two scales presenting depressions which the author believes to be due to the anthers. We would suggest