Prof. W. King's Notes on Permian Fossils. 339 



hratula hastnta, aiv in no respect diflFerent from the ordinary 

 forms of the present species" {vide p. 149). On again exami- 

 ning one of the Bolland specimens here referred to, having the 

 nearest resembhuice to Epitliyris clonyata, I perceive that the 

 surface of botli valves shows much stronger incremental breaks 

 than I have ever seen displayed on any specimens of the Per- 

 mian species : the valves, too, appear to be thicker. 



Epitln/ris sujfiata, Schlotheim. — I have elsewhere stated, that 

 this species " appears to be identical with a shell found in the 

 mountain limestone of Bolland, probably hitherto considered a 

 variety of E. sacculus — a distinct, though closely allied species*." 

 M'Coy supposes that the shell here referred to is identical with 

 his E. virguidc's-f ; but this is not the case. The Bolland 

 specimen noticed under the last head as resembling E. elunyata 

 has more affinity to M'Coy's species. I have been led to re- 

 examine the " shell found in the mountain limestone of Bol- 

 land," and 1 cannot but say, that it agrees most remarkably 

 with some specimens of the Permian species, particularly the 

 testiferous one represented under figure 7, pi. vii. of my ' Mo- 

 nograph.' On the other hand, there are specimens figured on 

 the same plate closely approximating to true forms of E. sacculus 

 in its mesial depression and emarginate front. The only dif- 

 ference I perceive between the Bolland shell alluded to and the 

 Permian fossil quoted is, that on the former there are faint 

 traces of a few longitudinal lines on the anterior half of the 

 valves. I perceive nothing of the kind on any of the Pei-mian 

 forms, nor do I recognize any on normal specimens of E. sacculus. 

 There appears to be no difference between them in their histo- 

 logical ])erforations. 



I have retained the generic name proposed in my ' jNIono- 

 graph' for those Terebratulida resembling the two species just 

 noticed, in having rostral plates and a shortish loop. V'ery few 

 palaeontologists appear to agree with me in this respect. I 

 intended making some observations on the question ; but as Mr. 

 Davidson is now engaged on species belonging to the same 

 group, to be ])ublished in the next part of his ' Monograph of 

 British Fossil Brachiopoda,' and feeling confident that he has 

 much important matter to make known as regards their interiors, 

 I prefer deferring them until the appearance of his work. I 

 may then be able to offer a decided opinion, either in favour of, 

 or against, my former views. 



Brachiopods appear, for the most part, to be confined to the 

 lowest deposits of the Permian system. In the North of Eng- 



* Monograph, )>. 150. t Bntish PalaM)zoic Fossils, p. 41.'i. 



22* 



