Germany under that name. They are probably the samé 
described b 
_ Liidephorus Pallasi M. V.& K.* Geinita, ib, pl 11, fig. 8, (ig 
; to represent some other shell.) This figure was CVF | 
dent see | 
identical with, Pleurophorus occidentalis Meek & Hayden, to which 
genus at least it certainly belongs. It may, or may not be, iden 
tical with some of the German shells referred to the Russia 
eci ed in regard to the true 
st; but if we are to be guid 
h of the type of that species by the figures and rere S 
tion published by its founders in the Geology of Russia, 
Nebraska shel, which is shown to have the posterior hingetee® 
least 0} . P a" } : 
* If Plewrophorus and Clidophorus are synonyms, or onl sections of the same 
genus, it is Pleuropher and not Clidophorus, as Prof. Geinitz seems to think, st 
: : Bonet i 14s, while Cedars ‘was aot published by Fe 
