Miscellaneous. 65 



It is indisputable, therefore, that Mr. Jeffreys had studied my 

 writings, and that the opinion entertained of them by him in 1866 

 was revoked in favour of that expressed by him in 1868; whilst that 

 expressed in 1868 has again in its turn been superseded by the very 

 positive contradiction it receives in his note in ' Nature ' published 

 a fortnight ago ! 



It is likemse deserving of special notice that Dr. Carjienter, who 

 might be supposed to have made himself acquainted with the whole 

 past literature of the subject, should, at p. 181 of the official copy of 

 his ' Preliminary Report on Dredging for 1868,' have thought it 

 expedient to single out from these two most conflicting statements 

 that which was oifered by Mr. Jeffreys in 1868 (see above), as evi- 

 dence that " Dr. WalUcKs just claims had not by any means com- 

 manded the universal assent of naturalists " — an assent to which, if 

 just, as it has now been most clearly proved that they were and are, 

 those conclusions were long ago entitled. 



"With regard to Mr. JcfFreys's division of oceanic animals into 

 "zoophagons" and "sarcophagous," I have nothing to urge beyond 

 my avowed inability to discern any valid physiological difference be- 

 tween those that are zooj)hagous and those that are sarcophagous. 

 It rests with Mr. Jeffreys to explain on what grounds he has felt 

 justified in declaring so emphatically that "none" of the animals 

 " of all kinds and sizes, everywhere abundant from the surface to the 

 bottom," observed by him in his exploration of the North Atlantic, 

 were phytophagous. 



It only remains for me to add that for 5-ears I stood alone 

 in maintaining, in opposition to the opinion of Ehrenbcrg and his 

 followers, that all plant-life becomes extinct at depths exceeding 400 

 or 500 fathoms, and that the nutrition of fhe Foraminifera and some 

 other orders of oceanic Rhizopods is effected by a special vital func- 

 tion, whereby they are enabled to eliminate, from the medium in 

 which they live, the elementary ingredients which enter into the for- 

 mation of their body- and shell-substances. The facts and reasoning 

 on which my observations were based wdll be found in the various 

 published papers &c. already referred to. 



I remain, Gentlemen, 



Yours very faithfully, 



G. C. Wallich. 

 Kensington, 

 December 24, 1869. 



On the Specific Distinctness of Anodonta anatina. 

 To the Editors of the Annals and Magazine of Naturcd History. 



Gentlemen, — There has been, and, I believe, still is, a diversity 

 of opinion as to whether ^nof/o»to aiuitiyia is a distinct species or only 

 a variety oi Anodonta cygnea. I have, since I commenced the study 

 of conch ology, inclined to the former view ; and I think I am now 

 able to bring forward ev-idence in favour of it which has not been 



Ann. & Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 4. Vol. v. 5 



