298 ; SOME OF PROFESSOR MARSH’S CRITICISMS. 
Though Prof. Marsh has published five papers and six notes on 
these animals, but one of his species has been so far partially 
described as to be of any use to science. Publishing of bare 
names * may constitute a caveat, but not an injunction, but in the 
present case the eee are too late. Hence the trouble. ‘ Hew 
quantus erat sudor,” e 
In one of Prof. can late 8 acia he asserts that Losolo- 
phodon cornutus and Tinoceras grandis are identical. . If this be 
true, the latter name must stand as a synonyme of the former, 
and Tinoceras be withdrawn from the synonymy of Uintatherium, 
where it might well remain so far as his description characterizes 
it. But if so, his statement that there are five superior molars 
must be altered, as the genus Lowolophodon possesses six. He 
‘has also stated that Uintatherium robustum possesses a small 
tubercle on one of the molars not found in U. mirabile, and bases 
a generic distinction between the species thereon; for use he at 
last succeeds in defining the latter as a species only. 
Perhaps, however, Prof. Marsh desires to impose upon scientific 
literature the numerous names he has proposed for species he has 
never described.f This he has attempted in the case of the fossil 
American Turkey, Meleagris superbus Cope, which was described 
by the writer over a year sooner than by him. At the latter date 
this species was discovered to have been called M. altus Marsh, 
some months prior to my description, but without any allusion to 
ifs characters or other means by which it could be identified. 
Prof. Marsh desires students to use his museum labels, without 
descriptions, he might refer to Bronn’s Š “Lethea Geognostica.” 
and other works, where he will find all such names consigned to 
the rubbish of synonymy so soon as it can be ascertained to what 
they refer. 
To sum up the matter, it is plain that most of Prof. Marsh’s 
criticisms are misrepresentations, his systematic innovations are 
untenable, ‘and his statements as to the dates of my papers are 
either criminally ambiguous or untrue. I might, now proceed to 
aa een ne 
*See the rule “adopted and practiced = students. In case of a genus there 
must be a definition giving the essential c racters.” From « Thorel’s European 
Spiders,” quoted in Wallace’s " 1 Society, London, = 
by W. M Piaras in “ Ent IN lature” in “Canadian Entomol 
1873, P- 32. ; 
t Sev eral of which owe which {I have 
— egay Phecachampes s squankensis is Nene advooaumié: minor “& Marsh.” 
