Mr. Bruoke on Conckology regarded as a Science. 209 



the animal and shell conjointly. This, however, is not to be done by 

 describing a shell, and calling it an animal, nor by imperfectly describ- 

 ing an animal of which very little may be known, and denoting it by the 

 name which has been previously given to the shell that covers it — a name, 

 as Monodonta, almost generally derived from some character of the shell 

 alone. 



If the animal inhabitants of all known shells were know^n, a classifi- 

 cation of those animals with appropriate generic and specific names, 

 according to the method adopted by Poli, would supply what might pro- 

 perly be termed "An Account of Molluscous Animals ;" but even in 

 this case it would be important to the naturalist to have the shells also 

 accurately studied, and perhaps separately named and described, in such 

 manner as might best exhibit their peculiar relations to the characters 

 and habits of their respective animals. And if there should be found 

 some inconvenience in having two sets of names and a double classifica- 

 tion, this would be more than compensated by the increased perspicuity 

 of the method. 



But if it would be useful to possess this double classification where the 

 animals are known, it becomes strictly necessary to keep the two systems 

 distinct, in order that one of them should embrace the fossil shells. 



The proper study of shells may indeed not unaptly be considered 

 analogous to that of the skeletons of the higher classes of animals, and 

 may be regarded as the comparative anatomy of the molluscous inhabit- 

 ants ; and if it were so pursued, those who study shells alone, might, 

 without the fear of being regarded as triflers, confess themselves to be 

 conchologists, and might thus assert their title to a place in the ranks of 

 science, on account of the additions they might, by induction, supply to 

 the present scanty knowledge of the shell-bearing animals. 



A few extracts will now be given from some of our latest writers on 

 these subjects, to shew the unsettled state of opinion upon even the first 

 principles of the method of treating this branch of natural history. 



Montagu, in his "Testacea Britannica," published in 1S03, (Introduction, 

 page 27,) says, "The Asddia is rather a numerous genus" (of animals,) 

 " is found to inhabit Pholas, Solen, some of the Mya, Mactra, and 

 " probably part of other bivalve Testacea : many species of the genus 

 " Ascidia are MoUuscd" — the terra Mollusca is here applied to animals 



Vol. V. o 



