Remarks on the sedimentary formations of New South Wales : illustrated by references to other provinces of Australasia / by W.B. Clarke.

  • Clarke, William Branwhite, 1798-1878.
Date:
1878
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Remarks on the sedimentary formations of New South Wales : illustrated by references to other provinces of Australasia / by W.B. Clarke. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    169/179 (page 164)
    appear as a third repetition of that in Australia (taking the Talchir group as representative of the Bacchus Marsh sandstones, I mean, it would be so) : Australia. Bacchus Marsh sandstones, with Gangamopteris. IT.—Newcastle beds, with Glossop- teris, PhyUotheca, Vertebraria, &c. Marine Carboniferous animals. I.—Glossopteris, PhyUotheca, &c., with Marine animals, &c., in New South Wales. India. III.—Damuda—Coal-bearing strata, with Glossopteris, PhyUotheca, &c. Talchir group, with Gangamopteris. Dr. Feistmantel writes that he will compare always with the formations his intended description of some of the Australian fossils ; says, “ it will be seen that the Australian Newcastle beds and the Damudas are not to be confounded.” With reference to the list now published, he says-— “ I send you to-day again the lists of the plants, &c., based on your first collection [forwarded to Cal- cutta], and on the quotations by other authors, as I have put it down in my manuscript (it may be, that in your collections, now expected, will be some other forms, which I shall communicate hereafter).” “ The ‘ Systematic Table ’ includes those species only which I could determine from your first collection, and which were described before by others, but there is every probability that in your recent collections there will be some other forms.” “ Of the two boxes you recently sent me, I received only that entrusted to Professor Liversidge. I found everything in order, and I am very much obliged to you for your great kindness. The specimens of Lepidodendron which were in that box as the L. nothum as from Goonoo Goonooand from Queensland, and the two small specimens from Smith’s Creek which you put in extrain an enve- lope are of great importance. The one (marked 154, Smith’s Creek, 1850) is again a Rhacopteris, and proves that my determination of the former specimens you sent from Smith’s Creek and Port Stephens were correct, when I put them down as Rhacopteris (comp.) inaquilatera, Gopp ; because this new specimen with more split leaves is to the former one (from the same localities) in the same relation as are certain forms in the Kohlenkalk and Culm of Silesia to the real Rhacopteris incequilatera, Gopp. I have described these forms from the Silesian Kohlenkalk with more split leaves as Splienopteris (Rhacopteris) Romeri, Fstm. (1873, ‘ Ltschr. cl. D. geol. Gesellsh.’) but more material proved hereafter that these very possibly belong as certain developmental states to Rhacopteris incequilatera, being connected with this later species by forms which were described as Rhac. Jlabellifera, Stur. (from the Culm flora). Indian and he Indian