to Micro- Paleontology. 297 
a resuscitation could be effected with the certainty that we 
had to deal with Fleming’s original specimen or specimens. 
In this repugnance to the revival of a title so defined origi- 
nally as to be absolutely undeterminable, [ think I should 
not find myself singular, especially when it is recollected that 
Fleming’s entire description (‘ Brit. Animals,’ p. 533) was 
as follows:—“ Cellepora Urii. Branched, round, about a 
quarter of an inch in diameter, form round.—Muillepore, Ure, 
Ruth. 228, t. xx. f. 1.” If, therefore, it should be proved 
that Tabulipora Urii (as described by Mr. Young) is a 
good species, it should, in my opinion, stand as 7. Uri, 
Young, and not as T. Urii, Flem. It may just be added that 
even admitting that Ure gave, to begin with, a good figure of 
his “ Millepore,” this is not one of the cases in which a figure 
can be used as a basis for specific identification, since all 
modern paleontologists would, I think, admit the total inade- 
quacy of a mere figure of the external appearance of a speci- 
men of one of the dendroid Monticuliporoids or Stenoporoids 
as a guide for specific, or even generic, determination. 
EXPLANATION OF PLATE X., 
1. A fragment of Stenopora Howsti, Nich., of the natural size. From 
the Carboniferous shales of Redesdale, Northumberland. 
2. Portion of the surface of the same, enlarged twelve times. 
3. A ange calice, enlarged twenty-four times, showing a perforated 
tabula. 
Fig. 4. Portion of a tangential section, taken across the unthickened seg- 
ments of the tubes, enlarged twelve times. 
5. Part of the same section, enlarged twenty-four times, showing 
interstitial spiniform tubes. 
6. Part of another tangential section, enlarged forty-five times, 
showing the original bounding-lines of the corallites. 
Fig. 7. Part of a tangential section, taken across the thickened portions 
of the corallites, at a point where a “macula” is present, en- 
larged twelve times. 
Fig. 8. Another tangential section, where no “ macula” is shown, simi- 
larly enlarged. 
Fig. 9. Part of the centre of a transverse section, showing the thin-walled 
polygonal axial corallites, enlarged twelve times. 
Fig. 10. Part of the periphery of a transverse section, enlarged twenty- 
four times, showing the beaded structure of the walls and the 
perforated tabulee. 
Fig. 11. Part of the periphery of a transverse section of S. Howsii, var. 
arctica, enlarged twenty-four times. 
