Fossil Terebratulz. 445 
marks, except that it must have priority over Terebratula orbicularis 
of Sowerby, M. C. 1829, of which Ter. furcata of the same author 
is only a young state. It is curious however to see, that notwith- 
standing M. D’Orbigny’s professions of attending always to date, 
that in his ‘ Prodrome’ he adopts Sowerby’s Ter. orbicularis, and 
makes no mention of Lamarck’s Ter. Cardium, published long 
before. Similar mistakes are not however rare in that work, nor 
would I here think it necessary to call attention to this point, if 
M. D’Orbigny’s severity towards others was not so forcibly 
brought forth in his writings *. The plaits, which are often 
divided towards the margin in this species m the young age, 
are also, though rarely so, in the adult, as may be seen on spe- 
cimens in M. Deslongchamps’ collection : the loop process also 
extended to near the margin, as I hope to illustrate in another 
work. Lamarck’s var. b, as can be seen from the specimens in 
the Garden of Plants, belongs to Terebratula spinosa. 
48. Terebratula difformis, Lamarck and Val. Pl. XV. fig. 48. 
T. testa trigonata, dilatata, subdepressa : margine inzequalis in medio 
sinuoso-deflexo : nate subproducta. 
Obs. Lamarck refers to ‘ Encycl. Méthod.’ pl. 242. fig. 5 a, b, ¢, 
and gives Cap la Heve near Havre, and Mans, both greensand 
localities. M.D’Orbigny admits this species in his ‘ Pal. Frang.,’ 
and places it in Fischer’s genus Rhynchonella. Terebratula dimi- 
diata, Sow., would also belong to the same species. However, if 
we inspect the specimens ticketed by Lamarck in M. Delessert’s 
collection, we shall find that three out of ten belong to his species 
from the Tourtia beds of Tournay; the others being oolitic 
shells, with the exception of one, which would appear to belong 
to Sowerby’s Terebratula latissima. 
49. Terebratula lyra (Sow. M. C. tab. 138. fig. 2). 
50. Terebratula Menardi, Lamarck and Val. Pl. XIV. fig. 50. 
T. testa gibberula, globosa, inferne truncata, valva majori sinu longi- 
tudinaliter sulcato excavata: margine sinuoso deflexo. 
Obs. In B. Delessert’s collection we find ten specimens of this 
* Certain things which might pass with the early naturalists cannot be 
allowed at the present day, such as simply to describe a species by a few 
words, which description would suit twenty others; therefore all the new 
names introduced into M. D’Orbigny’s ‘ Prodrome’ cannot claim priority. 
Should any one fully describe and figure before M. D’Orbigny any of those 
simply named species which have but three or four words of description 
and with no reference to figure, the names of the subsequent author ought 
to be retained ; otherwise the practice of M. D’Orbigny would retard science, 
Us say nothing of the injustice and abuses to which it would inevitably 
ead. 
