CONTRIBUTIONS TO PALAEONTOLOGY. 31 1 



Since the preceding matter was in print, as cited above (Vol. iv, Palce- 

 ontologij of Neio York, pp. 332-4), my attention has been called to an 

 article published in the Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge (p. 172), 

 and entitled Palceontology of the Upper Missouri, etc., etc., Part I, by P. B. 

 Meek and P. V. Hayden, on the sixteenth page of which I find the 

 following note : 



" la the Fifteenth Report of the Regents of the University of New York* 

 1862 (pp. 154-5), Prof. Hall proposes the name Zygospiea for a genus of 

 which Producta modesta, Say, is the type. It seems, however, that Mr. Conrad 

 had suggested for this shell the geuerio name Stenocisjia, which Prof Hall 

 proposed in Vol. i, Palceontology of New York (1847, p. 142) to adopt, should 

 this type prove to belong to a distinct genus. As there was no necessity for a 

 new name, Stenocisma will have to take precedence over Zygospiea." 



The tone of this paragraph denotes the language of a man accustomed 

 to speak with authority, and no one is expected to take exceptions. " It 

 seems, however, that Mr. Conrad had suggested for this shell the generic name 

 Stenocisma," etc. Where did Mr. P. B. Meek get the information that 

 Mr. Conrad had ever suggested for Producta modesta (Say), the name 

 Stenocisma, or any other name 1 The conceit and ignorance shown in 

 this paragraph are only equaled by its disingenuousness. 1 have already 

 quoted the remarks of Mr. Conrad in reference to the genus Stenocisma t 

 from his Second Annual Report. 



In the first volume of the Palceontology of New York all the Brachiopoda 

 of the general form of Atrypa, Rhynchonella, Terebratula, etc., were 

 described under the generic name Atrypa, since they had not then been 

 sufficiently studied to assign them to their proper relations ; and the use 



in my possession a lithographed plate of the fossils of the Losyer Helderberg group by Mr. Conrad, 

 with the names, in his own hand, written beneath the figures ; the species i have since designated 

 as R.formosa having there been identified with Terebratula schtutheiinii. 



Although the generic characters were not fully described, and with imperfect reference to species 

 I think it preferable to adopt this name instead of introducing a new one. 



The name Hemithtkis, applied by some authors to certain rhynchanelloid forms, has been used 

 to include very heterogeneous materials; and without citiug a long list to prove this, I may men- 

 tion H. aiigustifrons, M'Cor; H. subundata, M'Oor; H. hemispherica, var. scutica, M'Cor; all 

 figured on the same plate, and belonging to three distinct genera ; the first named being undoubtedly 

 a Mbeistblla, and having internal spires. This generic term, therefore, cannot be adopted unless 

 re-defined and very much restricted in its application. 



* The Fifteenth Annual Report of the Regents of the University of the State of New Fork 

 on the Condition of the State Cabinet of Natural History, etc., was published in 1862. The 

 Fifteenth Annual Report of the Regents of the University of the .'^tate of Nej) Vork was pao- 

 lished in 1787. The two documents should not be confounded. 



t Paleontology of New Fork, Vol. iv, p. 144, and p. 310 of this Report. Had the species 

 referred to been the T. schlotheimii, we should have had the name Stenocisma proposed for the 

 type of the Genus Oamakopuoria. 



