250 Twenty-third Report on the State Cabinet. 



The question regarding these Oboloid forms had occupied my atten- 

 tion for a long time, and in 1862, I wrote to Mr. Davidson mj views 

 of 0. Conradi^, sending a description and figures. Thus this was no 

 new idea of mine; but the progress of my work in 1871 required some 

 action on my part in order to prepare the supplementary plates of vol. 

 ly, Pal. ]Sr. y., and these were among the things to be first done. 



Oholus Canadensis I did desire to see, for I had known since 185-± 

 that it was a new and distinct genus ; and Mr. Selwyn did say that 

 Mr. Billings was at work at O. CanadenMs, but did not mention any 

 Gait specimens or species. 



Mr. Billings says, that his genus Obolellina " is intended to include 

 at least one of the forms descHhed " by him " as Oholus Canadensis.''^ 

 It may include also Rhtnobolus, but I think that has not yet been 

 shown by Mr. Billings' figm^es. 



As an explanation of applying " on two occasions," I may say that I 

 understood Mr. Selwyn's reply to my fii-st letter to be a refusal, and 

 the matter was of course dropped. Subsequently, Dr. T. Sterry Hunt, 

 authorized by Mr. Selwyn, gave an explanation which induced me to 

 renew the request. I was taking no advantage of Mr. Billings in any 

 way, for neither himself nor Mr. Selwyn had indicated his intention 

 in regard to Gait specimens, and those which I used had been in my 

 possession since 1848. 



As to the compact or agreement about describing jSTew York or 

 Canadian fossils, referred to and written about by Mr. Billings, I can 

 only say that I have never heard of it before now. I have always had in 

 my collections undescribed species of Canadian fossils, which I have re- 

 frained from describing from a natural sense of propriety. If I am 

 not mistaken, Mr. Billings has derived much material from New York, 

 by collectors sent expressly for that purpose, and, I have no doubt, has 

 made good use of it ; but I have never thought of complaining ; and I 

 have not entered into petty contrivances or insinuations to prevent 

 fossils going into his hands. If Mr. Billings' published statements and 

 private letters agree in regard to this matter, it is all that I can require. 



In my letter to Mr. Selwyn, of the 10th of April, 1871, alluding to 

 my work, I said, " the question of the Linguloid shells, Obolus and 

 Trimerella, was one requiring early determination ; "' and it was for 

 this reason that I had desired to see the Canadian forms. I was cer- 

 tainly under the impression that I had previously given Mr. Selwyn 



* In my letter to Mr. Davidson, of date 31st October, 1863, I wrote : " I enclose you 

 drawings of what I have proposed as a new genus of Brachiopoda. In some respects 

 it is like Oboi.us, but is a large calcareous shell, in my opinion of quite a new type. 

 I had originally communicated the description in my Wisconsin report, but afterward 

 withdrew it. Please give me your opinion of it. * * * * I propose the name 

 CoNUADiA for this fossil." 



