216 Mr. H. J. Carter on Foraminifera 



tilus {Calcarina) SpenglerV (which I shall show it to be 

 hereafter), is to me inexplicable, seeing- that the affinities of 

 Tinoporus vesicidaris are more with Polytrevia tniniaceum^ 

 from which, again, it is markedly different, as just stated, by 

 possessing nothing even analogous to the pseudopodial canal- 

 system of the latter. 



There is as much difference between Tinoporus haculatus 

 and T. vesicidaris as there is between Orhitoides and Orhi- 

 tolites. As Orhitoides dispansa, Sowerby, has a central 

 plane of nummulitiform chambers arranged spirally with a 

 convex, vertical, radiating development on each side of other 

 chambers, of a compressed cellular form, intermixed with 

 columns of solid shell-substance ending respectively in 

 prominent tubercles on the surface and extending to the very 

 margin of the disk, so has Tinoporus haculatus all this arranged 

 around a trochoid spire. On the other hand, as Orhitolites 

 Mantelli^ Carter, has a central plane of orbitolitiform chambers 

 (see Carpenter, Introd. pi. ix. fig. 8, c' c d c', and compare 

 with my figure, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 1861, vol. viii. 

 pi. xvi. fig. 2, h and g) with a convex vertical radiating deve- 

 lopment on each side of other chambers of a compressed cellu- 

 lar form without the said columns of solid shell-substance, so 

 does the structure of Tinoporus vesicular is extend in a radiating 

 structure from an indistinct centre to the circumference (fig. 

 20, h) also see Carpenter, op. cit. pi. xv. fig. 3). The only 

 means that T. vesicularis has of communicating with the ex- 

 terior is, as before stated, through the foraminated plates of its 

 chambers successively ; while T. haculatus has a distinct sys- 

 tem of interseptal canals for this purpose (Carpenter, op, cit. 

 pi. XV. fig. 12). 



All this the reader may find contrasted in two opposite co- 

 lumns of representations, side by side, in the Ann. & Mag. 

 Nat. Hist, of 1861 (vol. viii. pi. xvi.), which, so far as Orhi- 

 toides dispansa and Orhitolites Mantelli are concerned, was 

 all worked out by myself at Bombay in 1861, and pub- 

 lished in the Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist, before Dr. Carpenter's 

 ' Introduction ' of 1862. But Dr. Carpenter (Introd. p. 298, 

 &c.) has thought proper to differ from me ; and therefore I 

 must leave the student of Foraminifera to decide which is right, 

 merely observing that it is not satisfactory to be criticized by 

 one whose observations show that he is not so well acquainted 

 with the subject as yourself. 



Tinoporus haculatus of De Montfort is, as before stated, a 

 variety of Calcarina Spengleri. Out of the specimen of Tuhi- 

 pora musica have been obtained three species of Calcarina^ viz. 

 G. Spengleri^ C, hispida^ and C. calcar^ together with Tinoporus 



