viii. Introduction by the Editors. 



podal species and to have aimed at, or even required, an abso- 

 lute identification of his specimens with the published drawings 

 of recorded species. This has resulted in a great multiplication 

 of specific names in certain genera of the Lagenidse, a course of 

 which we do not approve as will be seen by our notes. The long 

 delay in publication has furthermore robbed Halkyard of the 

 authorship of many interesting forms which he found at Biar- 

 ritz, but which have, in the interval, been described and figured 

 from various localities by other authors. Six of his most 

 interesting species will be found to have been anticipated by 

 ourselves in our Monograph on the Foraminifera of Selsey 

 Bill published in 1908-9, the Eocene deposits of the Bill being 

 of similar age to those of Biarritz. Again, Liebus in 191 1 

 figured and described, as will be seen, another of Halkyard's 

 most interesting species. (See No. 321.) 



There are many points in Halkyard's paper with which we 

 feel bound to disagree, and it is probable that if he had con- 

 tinued to work at the subject he would himself have modified 

 his paper in many directions. As an example of this we may 

 mention his views on the sub-genus Siphogenerina, Schlum- 

 berger, which later research has proved to be an artificial dis- 

 tinction- But we have adhered to the principle of printing his 

 MS in full, confining ourselves as a rule to a supplemental note 

 in round brackets in which we record our opinion on Halkyard's 

 specimens, all of which were carefully examined by us and 

 compared with his notes and the figures of the authors referred 

 to. In the case of some 27 species we have found it impossible 

 to accept Halkyard's identification at all, and the name which 

 we propose to substitute is in these cases shown above Halk- 

 yard's and enclosed in square brackets. 



We should have been justified in changing the name in 

 many cases where we have not done so, but we have confined 

 ourselves to an expression of dissent in the supplementary note. 

 We have also added the 33 species which we have found either 

 in Halkyard's unexamined material, or, in some cases, on slides 

 labelled with the names of other species. These additional 

 forms are also distinguished by square brackets, and, as a rule, 

 without any comment as to distribution, &c, as we were not in 

 the position to give such information, owing to the nature and 

 extent of the material submitted to us. 



In conclusion we must mention a paper published in 1906 

 by Dr. Adalbert Liebus.* It is clear that Halkyard was in com- 



* A. Liebus, Uber die Foraminiferenfauna der Tertiarschichten von Biarritz. 

 Jahrb. d.k.k. geolog. Reichsanst. Wien. 1906. Vol. LVI. Ft. 2, pp. 351-366. 

 PL IX. and 8 figs, in text. 



