288 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
the specimen are not accurately drawn. On the same plate there is 
a drawing of a suture-line, which is referred to fig. 2. 
In the text of his work (p. 84) Blanford refers to Ammonites 
Wallichii the following figures: pl. xv, figs. la—c; pl. xix, figs. la-e, 
2Qa—-c. Now figs. la and 6 in pl. xv represent Gray’s type- specimen, 
but there is no figure lettered le in any copy of this plate that we 
have seen. There is a suture-line on this plate numbered in the 
‘Indian’ set 26 and in the ‘ English’ set 2d, fig. 2 being named in 
each case A. tenuistriatus, but that it does not belong to that 
species is evident from Blanford’s remark in his description of the 
species that ‘the sutures are not visible.” Now the suture-line of 
Gray’s type-specimen has been painted in as if for the purpose of 
being drawn, and one must admit that at least portions of it closely 
resemble fig. 26 (or 2d), but the lateral lobe is represented very much 
too deep. It seems, however, that the suture-line is intended for 
that of Gray’s type, and should therefore have been lettered le. 
This drawing, like figs. la and 4, is also reversed. 
3. AMMONITES TENUISTRIATA, Gray. 
The original of Gray’s figure of this species is in the British Museum 
collection (No. C. 5,051).! Gray’s figure is of the natural size, but is 
reversed. Some of the matrix has been removed since the specimen 
was figured by Gray, but there are still indications on the fossil of the 
original extent of the matrix. There can be no doubt whatever about 
its being the figured specimen. It is accompanied by a label belonging 
to the Museum of Practical Geolog ey, bearing the following inscription : 
‘Oolitic: Niti Pass. -Ammonites fenuistriatus. Coll. by Col. Strachey 
(belongs to Brit. Mus.).”’? The statement that it belonged to the 
Strachey Collection is obviously erroneous, for, as we have already 
stated, Gray’s figures were published many years before Colonel 
Strachey’s fossils were collected. Moreover, according to Gray, the 
type came from ‘‘ Sulgranees, Nepaul.” 
The National Collection also contains the specimen (No. C. 5,039) 
figured by H. F. Blanford in Salter & Blanford’s “ Paizeontology of 
Niti,” pl. xiv, fig. 2, and the natural mould (No. C. 5,036) from which 
was made the eutta- -percha cast figured in pl. xv, fig. 2a of the same 
work ; both specimens belonged to the Strachey Collection, and were 
transferred from the Museum of Practical Geology in 1880. As the 
former specimen is only doubtfully referred to this species, it seems 
evident that the two examples of this species examined and mentioned 
by Blanford (op. cit., p. 78) were those represented in pl. xv, fig. 2a, and 
pl. xv, figs. 26, 2e. Blanford states that one of the specimens which he 
examined was ‘‘ Hardwicke’s [i.e. Gray’s] type,” and since fig. 2a 
cannot possibly be that type, we are forced to conclude that figs. 2b, 2¢ 
of pl. xv were drawn from the type-specimen; and a comparison of 
the figures with the specimen supports that conclusion, Blanford’s 
1G. C. Crick: List of Types and Figured Specimens of Fossil Cephalopoda in the 
British Museum (Natural History), 1898, p. 26. 
