338 Bibliographical Notices. 



The rest of the book consists of the Catalogue itself, which 

 demands the best attention and is worthy of the highest praise and 

 recommendation that we can offer. It is a model for scientific 

 bibliographists, thoroughly and conscientiously worked out in every 

 respect, both as to literary and biological accuracy ; and herein it 

 stands high as a worthy successor (though within geographical and 

 palseontological limits) to H. G. Bronn's well-known ' Index Paloeon- 

 tologicus.' 



I. The Fishes (Pisces) have 198 pages, including a page of 

 notes of their doubtful specimens and unknown species. II. The 

 Amphibia and their miscellaneous fragments have 10 pages. III. 

 The Beptilia, with their miscellanea and Ichnites, occupy 92 pages. 

 IV. The Aves and their miscellaneous entries have 9 pages. V. The 

 Mammalia and their miscellanea 84 pages. There are also addi- 

 tional notes on localities, fishes, reptiles, &c. at pages 395 and 396. 



As the Mammalia occupied only six pages in Morris's 'Catalogue 

 of British Fossils ' in 1854, and the whole Vertebrate group only 

 forty-nine pages, we readily see how the number of known fossil 

 forms has increased since that date. The more elaborate synonymy, 

 however, partly from the more liberal plan adopted and partly from 

 accumulation of descriptive memoirs, has had some influence in this 

 necessary enlargement of the Catalogue. 



What we have to find fault with is — (1) The absence of initial 

 capitals to proper names and their adjectives, whereby much is lost 

 of the history of the species, especially to beginners. Why such 

 ultra-pedantic decapitation has ever been recommended it is difficult 

 to say, except that the old llomans had their writing all made in 

 letters of one size, and that modern printers have to reach a little 

 further for " capitals " than for " lower-case " letters. The Linneau 

 plan of giving capitals even to common nouns, if used for the 

 species, as well as to proper names, is preferable, for it helps 

 amateurs and beginners, and tho lists have a less dull and formal 

 appearance. (2) The frequent and arbitrary change of an author's 

 terminology when the specific name, being in the genitive case, has 

 ended with " i i," which termination is euphonious, good enough in 

 itself, and quite in accordance with Latin names, of which as many 

 end in "ius" as in "us." Uniformity cannot require the change, 

 for there is no need of uniformity at all in this matter, any more 

 than with the unfortunate guests of Procrustes. Curiously enough, 

 when this change is made and noticed in the Catalogue, the original 

 " i i " are placed in square brackets, thus [ ], as if this were 

 the correction of a mistake, whereas it is correct and true by the 

 right of the author of the specific term. (3) That aspis, as well 

 as lepis, is really feminine, though used as a masculine word, might 

 have been noticed at p. 395. (4) Excepting a pedantic " levesi- 

 ensis " instead of "Lewesiensis," an oversight in not giving E. 

 Charlesworth the credit of being the first to name specifically 

 Coryphodon Colchesteri, and the above-mentioned errors of judg- 

 ment in occasional pedantry as to forms of nomenclature, we find 

 no fault with this remarkably perfect and well- printed Catalogue. 



