30 Transactions of the Society. 



departure for South America.^ But d'Orbigny did not accept 

 this statement at all. He took the first opportunity of saying - 

 that de Ferussac published these "pretended rectifications which 

 I am far from adopting " unknown to him, and that he had 

 purposely omitted the figures which de Ferussac cites as being 

 too uncertain for admission into his system ; he points out, however, 

 that his classification was in no way altered by them. As we 

 shall see (p. 42) he was at this time much annoyed with de 

 Ferussac (who had died in the previous year), for not giving him 

 credit in his " Apercu historique sur les Cephalopodes " (Paris, 

 1 834) for having anticipated the discoveries of Dujardin.^ 



When d'Orbigny returned from South America he found that 

 several zoologists had been taking liberties with his work, and in 

 his Introduction to the Cuba Memoir he deals with some of them. 

 De Blainville in his " Faunes Francaises" (Paris, 1828) had not 

 followed his divisions, but had scattered some of d'Orbigny 's genera 

 among his different families, not keeping the whole of the so-called 

 microscopic Cephalopoda distinct as an Order.* Cuvier, on the 

 other hand, separated them under the name Camerines in the 

 second edition of his " Eegne Animal" (Paris, 1828-30),^ referring 

 the student to the "Tableau Methodique." Eang in 1829,*' and 

 Fischer de Waldheim in the same year,^ had adopted d'Orbigny's 

 classification without restriction. 



Deshayes in 1830 ^ in the " Encyclopedie Methodique," in his 

 article on Cephalopoda, and others, was the first zoologist to 

 attack d'Orbigny's whole plan of classification, which he declared 



^ He corrected some of d'Orbigny's misprints, e.g. Nodosaria scorpionus (I., p. 255, 

 No. 40) = Nodosaria {Beophax of Montfort, genre 83, vol. i., p. 330) scorpiurus. 

 (See de Ferussac's " Corrections," p. 179.) He adds, " Ajoutez a la synonymie 

 Orthoceras scorpiurus Blainv. Malac, p. 379." The pagination of the "Tableau 

 M^thodiqiie " in these "Corrections " is taken from one of the reprints, and there- 

 fore differs from the original work. 



■ VII., p. xxiv. ^ VII., p. xxvii. 



^ De Blainville was responsible for vol. v., " MoUusques," in the " Faunes 

 Francjaises ou Histoire natureUe generale et particuli^re des Animaux qui se 

 trouvent en France." The work was announced for publication in ninety livraisons, 

 of which twenty-nine only were published, without dates, between 1821 and 1828. 

 It is difficult to work out the order and chronology of the instalments from the 

 available copy in the British Museum. De Blainville's volume seems to constitute 

 the eighteenth livraison, published c. 1827-8, in which the majority of the Forami- 

 nifera are included in his third Order "Les Multilocules." He says (p. 23), 

 " Nous disposerons les genres assez nombreux que M. d'Orbigny le fils a etablis dans 

 cette famille d'apres la disposition des loges qui constituent la coquille, mais sans 

 pouvoir assurer que cet ordre est natureUe." His Section I., beginning with 

 Nodosaires, comprises most of d'Orbigny's Families ; Section II. comprises the 

 Milioles; and Section III. the Plan\ilaires (Frondicularia). (See d'Orbigny's 

 analysis in VII., p. xxiv.) 



^ Vol. iii., p. 22. This edition was revised and augmented by P. A. Latreille. 



« P. S. Eang, " Manuel de I'Histoire NatureUe des MoUusques," Paris, 1829, 

 p. 97. 



' Fischer de Waldheim, in BuU. Soc. Imp. Nat. Moscow, i. (1829) p. 329. 



* Vol. i., 1827, p. 224. As to this date see Sherborn's Bibliography, sub. 

 Lamarck. 



