BRYOZOA. 681 



CERIOPORID.E (e. g. Radiopora) should suffice in showing that 

 that is where they belong.* 



On page 290 and 291, we find the classification into families 

 adopted by Mr. Miller. We will review it in the alphabetical 

 order in which he arranges the divisions. 



The ACANTHOCLADIID.E include the same genera as on pages 397 

 and 398 of this volume, excepting that Pinnatopora Vine, is 

 not recognized and Glauconome retained instead. 



On pages 614 and 615 we give reasons for using Vine's genus 

 instead of Glauconome for such species as we place under it in 

 this volume. Glauconome can not be used for them for two 

 reasons: (1) As originally defined in Goldfuss' work the name 

 is synonymous with the previously defined Vincularia of Defrance. 

 (2) If founded upon the emended definition by Lonsdale in Mur- 

 chison's Silurian system, the type would necessarily be the G. 

 disticha Lonsdale, which is a Wenlock fossil and probably 

 quite different from the Devonian G. disticha of Goldfuss. An 

 examination of a number of specimens of Lousdale's species, 

 which we owe to the kindness of Mr, Vine, has convinced us 

 that the Wenlock species is totally different from those for which 

 Pinnatopora is proposed. In fact they cannot belong to the 

 same family, Lonsdale's G. disticha being closely related to 

 Nematopora Ulr., and probably constitutes an extreme member 

 of the Arthrostylidte. Billings' Helopora strigosa is a con- 

 generic species. 



The AMPLEXOPORID.E is the same as in this volume, save that 

 Monotrypella. a genus very closely related to Amplexopora, is 

 out being placed with the MONTICULIPORID.E under the ZOANTHA- 

 RIA. 



* Much evidence was published in Part I of our memoir on "American Palaeozoic 

 Bryozoa," (Jour. Gin. Soc. Nat. Hist. Vols. V, VI and VII), to establish the bryozoan 

 nature of the Monticuliporoids. More still, and, among the latter probably some of the 

 most important, was reserved to be drawn upon in case our views were criticised. But 

 no call being made upon it, and the reserve being reinforced continually by new evi- 

 dence gathered during the progress of our studies, we are now enabled to claim with 

 confidence, that when the subject is again taken up by us, we will support our views 

 with such an abundance of evidence that even the most skeptical of our opponents, 

 provided he is just, must be convinced of their truth. The matter for the paper on the 

 "Relations of Palaeozoic to Mesozoic, Tertiary and Recent Bryozoa," has been ready 

 for several years, and only awaits an opportunity when it may be published, properly 

 supported by illustrations. 



-85 



