THE DEVONIAN FOSSILS OF CANADA WEST. 355 
while the species in question constitute a group in the family Arcade. 
No Conchologist would think of admitting such a name as Cypricardites 
among the ARcADz.* 
In 1858, I published the genus Cyrtodonta and its sub-genus 
Vanuxemia, and illustrated them fully by figures shewing the internal 
characters of several species. (See my Report for 1858.) About the 
same time Professor Hall described the same genus under the names 
of Palearca and Megambonia the latter being identical with my sub- 
genus Vanucemia. His descriptions were (as he says) printed in 
1858, in the 3rd volume of the Paleontology of New York. At the 
foot of page 270 of that work the reader will find a note on the 
genus Cypricardites which shews very clearly that at the time the 
author had his new genera under consideration, Conrad’s genus was 
also receiving some attention as it had on several previous occasions. 
When my Report was published, Professor Hall seeing that 
his genus Palearca was too late, resolved if possible to revive 
Cypricardites for the purpose of suppressing Cyrtodonta. He there- 
fore issued a small pamphlet of 18 pages, (being part of the 12th 
Ann. Rep. of the N. Y. Regents, in which he gives his descriptions, 
and in addition thereto a note pointing out the identity of Cypricardites 
and containing Conrad’s figure. This probably appeared in May or 
June 1859, as it is noticed in the July No. of Silliman’s Journal of 
that year. In 1860, the 3rd Vol. of the Pal. N. Y., was published, 
but without the plates. On page 523 of that work, I find the follow- 
ing statement : 
‘At the time that my examinations and descriptions of PALmARcA were 
made (in 1857,) I had overlooked the genus Cypricarpites of Conrad, which 
was published in the Annual Geological Report for 1841. The description and 
figure correspond so nearly with the fossils which I have described that I feel 
compelled to adopt the prior name, which will include those described in this 
volume under the genus Patmarca, as well as those described by Mr. Bintines 
under the genera Cyrtopon and Vanuxemia.” (Compare the above with the 
note at the foot of page 270, Pal. N. Y., vol. 3). 
As for myself, I must say that when I described the genus Cyrto- 
donta, I was aware of Conrad’s description, but considered, as I do 
now, that the genus (having been suppressed by Professor Hall, and 
never acknowledged by paleontologists, or quoted by them except as 
* See Dana in Silliman’s Journal, 2nd Series, Vol. 28, p.149. 1859. 
