G. A. Lebour — On the Terms “ Bernician ” and “ Tuedian.” 21 
after the lapse of many years, have adopted it, and I may add, that 
it should have occurred independently to a writer in 1875 ; all this 
is good prima fade evidence that the name has something to recorn- 
mend it. Before discussing its merits, however, it may be well to 
consider what other names it was to take the place of. These we 
may divide into two sets — A, those which have a lithological sig- 
nitication, and which only constant usage can make us tolerate, 
and B, geographical names. 
A. — Lithological names : 
1. Mountain Limestone. 
2. Carboniferous Limestone. 
3. Sub-Carboniferous. 
4. Productus Limestone. 
B. — Geographical name : 
1. Condrusian (in part). 
Of the lithological names No. 1 is respectable by reason of its age, 
but it is singularly inapplicable to the numerous districts wliere the 
calcareous parts of the Lower Carboniferous are conspicuous by their 
excessive thinness or even by their absence. No. 3 is usually limited 
to America in its application, and would, I tliink, have no chance of 
being naturalized with us ; besiues, even American geologists while 
using it frequently condemn the terra. No. 5 is limited in its value, 
as it can only be properly used in connexion with the presence of 
Fusulina, and even then is decidedly a bad term, since that Fora- 
minifer is now known to ränge into the Permian, if not higher 
still. No. 6, including as it does large series of beds of doubtful 
age, some of which are not Carboniferous, would, I think, find no 
supporters, and although still much used on the Continent, is un- 
known in England. No. 8 is again a French name, formerly much 
in vogue, but as it is the most strictly lithological of the lot, it must, 
I venture to say, be also the worst of all. Against Nos. 2, 4, and 7 
there is not much to say, their use is well understood, but the facts 
yet remain, that the series is sometimes devoid of limestone, fre- 
quently yields no Producti, and often contains no Coal. 
It is curious that as against the eight chief lithological synonyms 
of Bernician, I can find but one geographical one which has ever 
been in common use. This name, “ Condrusian,” was proposed 
by Andre Dumont in or about 1843, and if equally good would 
therefore have priority over Dr. Woodward’s term. Condrusian, 
however, was made to include a great deal more than the marine 
Lower Carboniferous. It comprised Devonian rocks also, and the 
Condroz, whence the name is taken, is now associated in the minds 
of geologists more with the latter than with the former. Under 
these circumstances, and considering also that the term was probably 
meant as a strictly local one by its author, it will be well to place it 
with the eight preceding names as being each and all liable to mis- 
interpretation, although no doubt blind custom will perpetuate the 
use of some of them — probably the worst. 
FLaving endeavoured to show the disadvantages under which 
labour the rivals of “ Bernician,” it is time to consider the advantages 
of that name. In the first place it is geographical, it is derived froin 
5. Fusulina Limestone. 
6. Anthraciferous Series (in part). 
7. Carboniferian (in part). 
8. Blue Limestone ((Jalcaire bleu). 
