INTRODUCTION. XXIU 



it was admitted as a native into the cabinets of local col- 

 lectors with even a less degree of circumspection than 

 previously, and subsequent authors, misled by the assertions 

 of their self-deceived friends (too often willingly deceived, 

 for a specimen worthless as exotic, was quickly metamor- 

 phosed into a rarity, when supposed to represent a locally 

 scarce species), added the weight of their authority to 

 promulgate the original error. Montagu, in one of his 

 letters, written subsequently to the publication of his great 

 quarto work on " British Conchology,"' laments the too 

 easy credence he had given to the accounts of his friends, 

 and earnestly deprecates any further attempts at augment- 

 ing our fauna, without strict investigation and mature 

 deliberation. 



Peculiar pains have been bestowed, throughout this work, 

 to arrive at sound conclusions in regard to the retention or 

 rejection as indigenous of the many species hitherto doubt- 

 fully allowed to remain in our catalogues. The original 

 specimens of the hypothetically spurious species have been 

 sought for and examined, that their worn or perfect con- 

 dition might serve as an auxiliary means of eliminating the 

 truth, in balancing the probabilities of their having been 

 tempest-driven upon our coast (the spoils of some wrecked 

 merchantman), or calmly wafted upon our sands from their 

 native depths. The importance of this actual examination 

 may be inferred from the fact that Dr. Leach took fragments 

 of foreign coral* from several of Montagu's own specimens! 

 The different value at which we must rate the testimony^ 



* " It is well known that some Conchologists shamefully imposed upon Mon- 

 tagu, and that Dr. Leach took fragments of foreign coral from several of the 

 shells that had been in his possession."" (Bean's Letter.) " General Bingham 

 was notorious for being imposed on as to indigenousness." (Jeffreys' Letter.) 



t As a general rule, the unsupported testimony of Laskey or Bryer is not to 

 be depended upon. 



