413 
Mr. H. J. Carter on For •aminifera. 
which a minute Diatomacean, or other object of a like kind, 
is used for this purpose {ex. gr. Perty’s ‘ Kleiner Lebens- 
formen,’ 1852, Taf. ix. fig. 8). 
Here is the “old story” again of classifying from resem¬ 
blances without knowledge of structure, which so characterizes 
the history of the Foraminifera even up to the present day—- 
to wit, the Dactylopora! Of course it is much easier to de¬ 
scribe from dried specimens than to follow up the organiza¬ 
tion of an animal, both living and dead, anatomically and micro¬ 
scopically ; hence the egregious mistakes that are committed 
in classification by what may be termed the “ lazy method.” 
My answer to Mr. Norman’s objections to using the term 
Squamulina for S. varians , and identifying it with Max 
Schultze’s diagnosis (‘ Organism us der Polythalamien,’ p. 56), 
may be found above in the discussion of this question. 
As to the absence of pores in arenaceous and porcellanic 
tests (IMPERFORATA auctt.), so insisted on by some, and stated 
by Max Schultze to be the case in Squamulina , I do not share 
in this opinion as regards the former, simply because I have 
seen them in Bdelloidina aggregata , Cart. (Ann. 1877, vol. xix. 
p. 202, &c.) ; and as regards the “porcellanic” test, wherein 
they have not as yet been demonstrated, inference, as well as 
the aqueous character of the living active sarcode in TE thulium ^ 
makes me doubtful of the extreme degree of minuteness to 
which this, if stretched out, may extend—perhaps sufficient to 
be beyond the power of the most aided vision, like that of the 
Diatomacese. If we do not suppose this, we must infer that the 
additions to the external surface of the test are made by a 
reflection of the sarcode from the aperture analogous to that of 
the mantle in Cyprcea. At the same time, among some sili¬ 
ceous casts of extreme beauty from the sea-bottom near 
Panama, kindly presented to me by Mr. F. Kitton, there is a 
perfect one of a Miliola on which, in several parts, but espe¬ 
cially about the angle, there are processes representing casts 
of the pores which originally pierced the porcellanic test. 
With reference to Mr. Norman’s strictures on my changing 
Dr. Bowerbank’s name of Ilaliphgsema Tumanowiczii to Squa¬ 
mulina scopula , I must refer the reader to the 1 Rules for 
Zoological Nomenclature, drawn up by the late H. E. 
Strickland, M.A., F.R.S., assisted by many Zoologists, British 
and Foreign, at the instance of the British Association,’ ed. 
P. L. Sclater, 1878, p. 10, viz. :— 
“ § 11. A name maybe changed when it implies a false pro¬ 
position which is likely to propagate important errors.” 
The original specimens of Ilaliphgsema Tumanowiczii , Bk., 
from the collections of the late Dr. Bowerbank now in the 
British Museum, bear respectively the labels, “My own dis- 
