647 
and. enriched. by the labours now so vigorously directed to that point 
by government authority, I trust that geologists will parden the 
omissions and defects of the person who first toiled to unravel the 
phenomena of that region, assisted only by a very few of its kind 
inhabitants*. . Such personal eonsiderations are, however, of little 
moment, and I pass from them te that. which is of real importanee, 
the establishment of the best paleeozoie classification. 
Now the first question is, have any such new lights been thrown 
upon the subject of the elder.rocks by the recent work of Mr 
Phillips upon Devonshire, as to change the nomenelature previously 
adopted both at home and abroad, and to substitute for it that pro- 
posed.by Mr, Phillips, namely, Upper, Middle, and Lower Paleozoic 
strata? I confess that as I read this volume I perceived none, ex- 
cept that after describing the species, the author shows that the fos- 
siliferous strata of the Eifel are the equivalents of those of South 
Devon, a point, however, whieh had been previously established. by 
Professor Sedgwick and myself. > re 
- Adopting from ourselves the word “Paleozoic,” Mr, Phillips: ex 
tends however its original meaning, and applies it to all the strata con- 
taining organic remains, from the oldest formation to the Magnesian 
limestone inclusive. His Lower Paleeozoie rocks are admitted to be 
exactly synchronous with those which were worked out as types 
under the name of Silurian, and yet he entirely omits that term in his 
parallel table of equivalents, in which he styles them “ Transition 
and Primary Strata;’ whilst for the ordinary names to parallel with 
his “ Middle Paleeozoies,” the much newer terms of Eifel and South 
Devon are made use of—terms of comparison, it will be recollected, 
which were introduced by Professor Sedgwick and myself long ufter 
the establishment of the Silurian type. I ask those geologists who 
supported me by their approbation throughout my labours, if the 
name first proposed by him who worked out and defined a system 
of classification, is to be suppressed when not only no evidence is 
brought to disprove its value, but when succeeding observers in 
various parts of Europe and America have sanetioned it. But as 
this is now simply a subject of nomenclature, and my facts are not 
disputed, let us see whether for all the practical purposes of our 
science, the term Silurian, as first proposed, ought to be preferred, 
in use, to the term * Lower Paleozoic,” which is to supplant it. 
* In preparing my work I derived much assistance from a valuable 6ri- 
ginal MS. on the Structure of Shropshire by Mr. A. Aikin, the earliest 
modern geologist, who, with his associate Mr. I. Webster, worked in this 
field; whilst my chief co-operating friends were the Rev. T, T. Lewis of 
Aymestry, Dr. Lloyd of Ludlow, and Mr. Davies of Llandoverey.. It is; 
however, to Mr. Lewis that I am more indebted than to any other person, 
for he had acquired a yery accurate knowledge of the order of the strata, of 
his neighbourhood before I yisited it. He was, indeed, my companion in 
the field in visiting several important localities, and as I can truly say 
“hee meminisse juvat,”’ 1 sincerely thank a friendly eritic in the Edinburgh 
Review, April 1841, for having dwelt upon these facts in the history of 
the *‘ Silurian System.” Es 
