336 Prof. W. King's Notes on Permian Fossils. 



Genus Camarophoria, King. 



Camarophoria glohulina, Phillips*. 



The occuiTence of this species in Germany has not yet been 

 recorded except by Professor M'Coy, who states that he found 

 numerous specimens of it from Gliicksbrunn in Count Miinster's 

 collection (now in the Cambridge University Museum) under the 

 manuscript name Terehratula bisinuata-[. 



Camarophoria multiplicata, King J. 



Schauroth records the occurrence of this species in the lower 

 Permians of Germany, without, how^ever, stating its localit)\ 

 Geiuitz represents two specimens in his ' Versteinerungen ' (pi. 4. 

 figs. 48, 49) apparently the same. M'Coy unites it with C. 

 Schlotheinii ; but I must still adhere to the opinion that both 

 are specifically distinct on the grounds stated in my Monograph. 



* King's Monograph, p. 120. pi. 7- figs. 22-25. 



t British Palaeozoic Fossils, p. 443. 



X Monograph, p. 121. pi. 7- figs. 26-32, pi. 8. figs. 1-7. 



were more prone than others to become thus altered. In the genus Rhyti- 

 chonella, it is true, no one had, that I am aware of, discovered any per- 

 forations ; but after carefull}' examining a number of fossil species I was led 

 to believe, that certain verj" minute dark jioints, which I observed here and 

 there dispersed over the surface of their valves, were the remains of orifices 

 belonging to extremely minute jjerforations. I may have been deceived as 

 to the nature of much that my " Stanhope " revealed to me ; but will any one 

 absolutely say that I was so in all cases, now that it is known that perfora- 

 tions do indisputably exist in Rhynchonellal Geinitzianal A few v.ords as 

 to Rhynchonella psittacea — the only species, from its occurring in the recent 

 state, that was likely to settle the question raised by my remarks. I did 

 not examine this species ; but I was acquainted with Dr. Carpenter's ac- 

 count of its histology, which account, since 1 am compelled to defend 

 myself, I must say seemed to me a very faulty one. Had I been imbued witli 

 the same spirit which Dr. Carpenter manifested when writing his animad- 

 versions, I might have severely criticised it ; but I valued his general obser- 

 vations too highly to indulge in any criticisms of the kind. Dr. Carpenter's 

 description of the shell-tissue of Rhynchonella psittacea is so far from cor- 

 rect, that I naturally inferred he must have been equally in error in con- 

 cluding it to be without perforations. Referring to Dr. Carpenter's first 

 " Report,'"' paragraphs 37 & 38, it will be seen that the tissue of this species 

 is described as consisting of sharply folded " laminae of extreme tenuity ;" 

 and it is stated that the " sharp foldings " produce an appearance as if 

 the laminae were " traversed by a very regular series of lines." In para- 

 graph 36, this conformation is describeti as " a peculiar variety of the 

 plicated membranous stnicture." Now I may be jiermitted to state that 

 this is quite an erroneous description of the shell-tissue of Rhynchonella 

 psittacea ; since it does not consist of " laminae of extreme tenuity " with 

 " sharp foldings;" but of closely packed fibres precisely analogous to the 

 " capillary fibres" or " fibrous tissue," noticed in my ' Monograph ' as con- 



