said to be found in Carboniferous Rocks. 4] 
Camarophoria Schlotheimi, Von Buch. 
This species, I have remarked, “closely resembles the C. cru- 
mena of Martin, which appears only to differ from the former 
in being narrower and more acuminated behind. Occasion- 
ally, however, a variety of the present species occurs which 
can scarcely be distinguished from C. crumena ; in short, both 
species apparently merge into each other so completely that 
many would be inclined to consider them as specifically in- 
separable. The Lamarckian might very reasonably instance 
them as proving proximate species to be modifications of each 
other; while, at the same time, his opponent might with equal 
reason contend for their being the result of a single specific 
creation. There is another species, undescribed, occurring in 
the Carboniferous limestone of Weardale, Durham, and having 
a still closer resemblance to CO. Schlotheimi in form; but its 
spatula-shaped process is decidedly more curved—so much so, 
that its termination is not far removed from the anterior end 
_ of the arch of the large valve.” And in a foot-note appended 
to the above, it is stated,—‘‘ The Gilbertsonian collection in the 
British Museum contains a card labelled Terebratula plica- 
tella, Dalman, and mounting nine specimens with from three 
to five ribs in the sinus. No locality is given: they are un- 
doubtedly Carboniferous. My note states that they are iden- 
tical with C. Schlotheimi; but I now suspect them to be the 
| same species as the one noticed in the text, found in Weardale, 
| Durham” (vide “ Monograph of Permian Fossils of England,” 
pp. 119 and 120). Mr Davidson has not alluded to the 
| relationship between the two species named in his “ Mono- 
| graph of British Permian Brachiopoda;” but I perceive he 
| has united them in his “ Scottish Carboniferous Brachiopoda”* 
under Martin’s name crumena. Observing in the paper last 
_ noticed a reference to an unpublished part of the former work, 
I wrote to Mr Davidson, requesting him to favour me with a 
| copy of his observations, if printed, on Camarophoria crumena. 
| He in the kindest manner sent them to me by return of post. I 
perceive he has quoted most of the passages just extracted from 
my “Monograph,” and has followed them up by these obser- 
* Vide Geologist, vol. iii. p. 34, Jan. 1860. 
NEW SERIES.—VOL. XIV. NO. 1.—JULY 1861, -F 
