302 Miscellaneous. 



of pneumonia ; the unfavourable symptoms rapidly developed, and 

 he died on the 10th. 



His character was in all respects a fine one — that of one of those 

 sterling men whom the more you know the more you appreciate. 



Dr. Brady was buried on January 14th in the old cemetery at 

 Jesmoud, Newcastle-upon-Tyne ; the funeral was attended by 

 numbers of the medical and scientific men of the neighbourhood. 



Dr. Brady's numerous contributions to our knowledge of the 

 Foraminifera need not be particularly referred to. Some of these 

 were written in conjunction with his late friend Dr. Carpenter, others 

 jointly with Parker and Jones. His great and magnificent work on 

 the Foraminifera of the ' Challenger ' must long remain the chief 

 authority on the subject. 



At the British Association meeting held in Newcastle in 1863 

 Brady was instrumental in founding the Pharmaceutical Conference, 

 which has since that time held its meetings immediately before 

 those of the British Association itself. Of that Conference he was 

 himself President at Brighton in 1872, and again at Bradford in 

 1873. 



In 1874 he was elected F.Pt.8., and in 1888 became a member of 

 the Council. In 1886 the University of Aberdeen bestowed upon 

 him an honorary LL.D. ; and in the same year he had the honour of 

 receiving a gold medal from the Emperor of Austria in recognition 

 of services rendered to the National Museum. 



His very extensive collection of Foraminifera was presented by 

 him during his life to the University of Cambridge ; and the great 

 ' Challenger ' collections, with many other types given by Brady, 

 can be consulted in the British Museum. 



The Genus Limacella. 



On pp. 184-186 of the February number Mr. Pilsbry has some 

 remarks on the genus Tebennophorus or Limacella, to which I may 

 perhaps be permitted to reply, taking his several points in order. 



(1) That plate of Blainville's has certainly received bad treatment. 

 The figures have been inaccurately copied ; Fe'russac quoted it 

 wrongly ; and now, as Mr. Pilsbry has shown, I also have 

 erred with regard to it ! There are two figures iv., labelled 

 respectively 1 and 2. Fig. 2 is obviously Veronieella, but 

 fig. 1, for which alone my reference was intended, looks like 

 Limacella, though from Blainville's text it is clearly intended 

 for Veronieella also. I quite agree with Mr. Pilsbry that 

 fig. iv. no. 1 might or might not from its appearance be of 

 the genus under discussion ; and as it is stated to be Veroni- 

 eella, there apparently remains no doubt that my reference 

 of it to Limacella was erroneous. I am still of the opinion, 

 however, that fig. v. represents Ihc genus American writers 

 call Tebennophorus. 



