BibJhtfjraphical Notices. 353 



as strictly fulfilling its title. Mr. Clark's observations have been 

 made entirely at one |)oint of our coast, and the work before us cer- 

 tainly proves how mneh may be done by an energetic observer in a 

 single locality, but wc think it would have been as well if a less pre- 

 tentious title had been chosen; — "Observations on the Mollusca of 

 the South Devonshire Coast," would have exactly expressed the con- 

 tents of the book. 



But even in its most limited sense, the appearance of this work 

 must be regarded with great interest. For upwards of forty years 

 the author has been engaged in studying the Mollusca ; and many of 

 the results of his observations have already been published either in 

 scattered papers by himself, or as contribulions to the works of 

 others, — Messrs. Forbes and Ilanley especially are largely indebted 

 to him. In tact thei-e can be little doubt that Mr. Clark has ex- 

 amined the animals of more species of the British ^follusca than any 

 other malacologist, and many writers have expressed their regret that 

 he did not bring out his observations in a collected form. 



The ])resent work may be regarded as a fulfilment of this wish. It 

 contains, in addition to o'jservations hitherto unpublished on numerous 

 species of British ^lollusca, reprints of the author's papers which have 

 appeared in this Journal, and of the notes furnished by him to Pro- 

 fessor Forbes for his classic work on the British MoUnsca. Subsequent 

 observations have proved many of the author's former statements to 

 be incorrect, but it is much to be regretted that, instead of modifying 

 his descriptions, he has printed them in their original form, followed 

 by observations commencing with "Since the above was written," 

 which not unfrequently contradict the statements made a page or two 

 before. Mr. Clark tells us that he has done this with the express 

 design of showing the process through which he has arrived at his 

 present results, and there can be no doubt that it has the advantage 

 of furnishing us with a test for the amount of reliance that may be 

 placed on the author's observations; but it must be confessed that he 

 would certainly have benefited his rcjiutation as an observer, had he 

 adopted some other course, for the numerous instances in which the 

 author's first (published) impressions have required correction from 

 his subsequent observations, render it by no means easy to place im- 

 plicit faith in his statements when not confirmed by other observers. 

 As an instance iu point, we may refer to the author's descriptions 

 of the branchiai in Pandora obtusa. In a note communicated to 

 the authors of the ' British Mollusca,' Mr. Clark described this ani- 

 mal as possessing " two palpi, one branchial lamina and (perhaps) an 

 obsolete one, on each side the body ;" at p. 1.1 1 of the present work, 

 he tells us that he " can now say beyond dispute (!), and show the 

 fact by preparations, that there are two palpi and two branchiae on 

 each side," whilst in the Appendix (p. .")13) he returns to his original 

 opinion. It is evideiat that little dependence can be {)laced on the 

 observations of an author whose statements upon a sim[)le niatter of 

 fact are so variable, and the instance here cited, although perhaps t 

 may be rather au extreme case, is by no means without its parallels 

 in other parts of the book, whilst *?»^/e- changes of opinion are not 



Ann. ^ Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 2. Vol.w. 23 



