RELATIONSHIPS OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAINOZOIC SYSTEM. 
was published, reading as follows :—‘ Small Nummulites (near N. 
variolaria) and Amphistegina? In the Muddy Creek Tertiaries 
(Hamilton beds). South Australia.* T. Rupert Jones Coll.” 
The previous determination made by Prof. Jones in 1865 was 
the correct one; and here he was evidently misled by the large 
size of the Amphisteginae, which on casual inspection might be 
readily assigned to the genus Nwmmulites. In his earlier deter- 
mination, Rupert Jones had, without doubt, carefully examined 
these forms and satisfied himself as to their amphistegine nature. 
Mr. Walter Howchin, in his valuable and comprehensive 
account of “ The Foraminifera of the Older Tertiary of Australia 
(No. 1, Muddy Creek, Victoria).’’*+ recorded Amphistegina lesson, 
d’Orb., and Nummulites variolarva, Sow., from the upper and lower 
beds (Kalimnan and Balcombian), and mentioned in the descrip- 
tion of N. variolaria the probability of the specimens from the 
upper bed being derived from the lower bed. 
In the course of work on the Tertiary fossils of southern 
Australia since 1902, I have had occasion to microscopically 
examine samples of foraminiferal rocks from nearly all Victorian 
and many South Australian and other localities, and in every 
case have failed to find a true Nummulite, although many 
specimens were put aside as doubtful until sections were made 
from them. Latterly I wrote to my friend, Mr. Howchin, 
asking him for samples of the supposed Nummulites which he 
possessed. These he very kindly forwarded, and on my returning to 
him sliced examples of the shells, Mr. Howchin concurred with me 
as to their relationship with Amphistegina. At the same time he 
very generously favoured me with a note for publication which will 
explain how the confusion had arisen in the determination of these 
difficult forms. 
Mr. Howchin writes :—‘*‘ When working up the foraminifera of the 
Muddy Creek beds, I was writing to Brady on sundry matters, and 
enclosed a few of the large nummuline-like forms that are a 
prominent feature in the Muddy Creek material. Under date, 
25th October, 1886, Brady replied as follows :— Firstly with regard 
to your specimens. 1. Nummulites in quill. So far as can be made 
out, this does not materially differ from Num. variolaria—assuming 
these are fully-grown species and not the young of some larger 
species. I do not altogether trust my knowledge of the distinctions 
marking the allied varieties of this group—the subject has become a 
special one. However, von Hantken, of Pest, to whom I was writing, 
and enclosed one or two of the specimens, replies to the same effect.’ 
Tam afraid that I accepted too readily, and without due examination, 
the testimony of those two experienced authorities. It is only fair 
* For South Australia read Victoria; a frequent error, made even by some Australian 
naturalists. 
+ Trans. R. Soc. §. Austr., vol. xii. (1888), 1889, pp. 1-20, pl. i. 
[21] 
