THE FAMILY OF UUIONID.E. XXV 



into symphynote and non-symphynote, which groups are again divided into plicate, 

 nodulous, spinous, sulcate and smooth shells. Each of these is subdivided into 

 nine groups dependent on the outline of the plane of the valve, viz., into quadrate, 

 triangular, oblique, oval, oblong, subrotund, wide, obovate, and arcuate, as in the 

 following table : — l 



1 In regard to priority of claims of date, I have never considered that the old rule of dating the 

 discovery of a species at the time it was read before a scientific society, should have been altered as it 

 has been by many bodies of science. My experience has satisfied me that justice to the discoverer could 

 best be rendered by retaining the old rule. In all cases I adhere to this, and date my papers in accord- 

 ance, and accord the same to others. It is the custom with the two leading societies of Europe, the 

 French Academy and the Royal Society, as well as the American Philosophical Society in this country, 

 the Asiatic Society of Bengal, and others. The Report of the Committee of the British Association, Aug 

 1856, recommends a Catalogue of European and American Philosophical Memoirs to be made, and, where 

 published in Transactions, the date of reading to be stated. Under the cover of the rule of printed issue, 

 Mr. Conrad* and Mr. W. G. Binney have misstated dates of many of my species, which dates are erro- 

 neous even under the rule of printed issue. Thus Mr. Binney, in the publications of the "Smithsonian 

 Collections," Bibliography of North American Conchology, Part I. 1863, gives the dates which he finds in 

 the imprint of a volume, although he knew that parts of the volume were issued printed, perhaps years 

 before. I therefore protest against the manifest errors which arise from such proceeding. This is in 

 accordance with the fact that while he published in this volume the erroneous dates of Mr. Conrad's Syn- 

 opsis regarding my species of Unionidse, he omitted my tables of rectification of these dates, which of 

 course rendered the Bibliography incomplete and was an act of injustice to the science of the country. 

 When the omission was pointed out by me to Prof. Henry, Sec. of the Smithsonian Institution, he 

 kindly promised it should be remedied in an appendix. 



In the following year, when Part II. came out, in Appendix to Part II. Mr. Binney inserted a simple 

 list of little more than a page of my species without a single date! This list was a mere mockery, and 

 the observation that "Mr. Lea having requested that the whole of his ' 'Rectification 1 should be published, 

 I add a list of the species to which he refers in that paper, in addition to those quoted by me on p. 384, 

 Part I." is not the fact.| I never requested Prof. Henry to have the whole of my "Rectification" published 

 in this Bibliography; I wished only the tables of species with dates of the time read and the time issued 

 printed, and I sent a copy marked as requested by Prof. Henry, to be so inserted. Mr. Binney had given 

 Mr. Conrad over eight pages, double column, for his Synopsis, and to my "Rectification" four lines!! 

 Addressing Prof. Henry on this second wrong, he requested another marked copy with the tallies I wished 

 to be inserted, and in Appendix iv. 18G6, under his own name, I obtained this very slow partial justice. 



* Mr. Conrad in his "Catalogue of the Eocene and Oligocene Testacea of the United States," in Am. Jl. of Set., 

 vol. i., makes some of my species synonyms to his, by dating mine in " 1834," while my " Contributions to Geology" 

 was on sale about the first of Dec. 1833, and has the imprint of 1833 ! It had an extended notice in the Jan. No. follow- 

 ing of Silliman's Journal. 



f "I send you at once the part of my 'Rectification' which should have been inserted to neutralize the poison of 

 the 'Synopsis' of Mr. Conrad." — Extract of Letter of I. Lea to Prof. Henry, Nov. 20, 1803. 



And in my letter of Feb. 8, 18G0, to Prof. Baird, who was attending to the "Smithsonian Collections," I said, "You 

 must be aware that I never requested to have my 'Rectification reprinted.' It was only these important tables of facts 

 and not the argument," &e. 



Mr. Tryon, in his excellent "American Journal of Conchotomy?' 1 vol. i. p. 270. commenting on these errors of dates 

 says, "Mr. Lea, however, immediately proved the time of publication (printed) of some of these parts of the volumes 

 of Transactions, and, consequently, the prior date of certain of his species by evidence which has never been questioned. 

 Yet Mr. Binney has not deemed it advisable even to mention the dates stated by Mr. Lea, except in regard to four species 

 only, and thus those who in future times depend, as they certainly will, on the Bibliography, for the synonymy of these 

 species, will be misled into the perpetration of a wrong." 

 G 



