(Review of decent Literature. 59 
berg. Probably Nicholson may be cited as an exception, but Nicholson 
is also a zoologist in the modern sense, and this may be accepted as a 
sufficient explanation of his position respecting the use of these conflict- 
ing terms. 
There are a few errors that have been overlooked in compiling the 
list of "errata." By some jvigglery of the engraver and printer the fam- 
ily names at the head of plates i and vi have exchanged places. It is 
something of a surprise to find on plate i Streptelasma and Zaphrentis 
ranged under the head of Favositidce — a form of surprise that is repeated 
when we find, on plate iv, a number of specimens of our old acquaintance, 
Favosites helderbergice Hall, masquerading under the family name of 
CyathophyllidcE. In the description of plate xvi, the generic name 
Ceramopora has lost an o, and becomes, through another bit of crooked- 
ness on the part of the printer, Cerampora. On the whole, however, 
mistakes of proof-reading, or of any other sort, are exceptionally few. 
Palaeontologists will have occasion chiefly to regret the limitations as to 
size under which the volume was prepared, making it impossible to in- 
clude all the forins now known from American strata of the age of the 
Upper Helderberg and Hamilton periods. 
On the monticuUporoid corals of the Cincinnati groups zvith a critical re- 
vision of the species. By U. P. and Joseph F.James. (From the pro- 
ceedings of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, October, 1887.) 
"The group of fossils known under the general name of monticuliporoids 
represents a wonderfully diversified series of forms. Not many years 
ago they were considered too obscure and too difficult for the ordinary 
student, and collectors, as a rule, paid little attention to them. One of us 
was among the first to call attention to them, and in 1871 issued a cata- 
logue of the fossils of the Cincinnati group, the first of its kind, in which 
were named provisionally a few new species. A second edition of the 
catalogue was published in 1875, and here two of the previously named 
species, and two new ones were described. In the same year the second 
volume of the Ohio Palceontology was issued, and in this professor H. 
Alleyne Nicholson described and figured a number of species under the 
generic name Chcetetes^ adopting some of the names proposed in the 
catalogue of 1871. Between 1875 and 1881 were issued various papers or 
volumes containing descriptions of other new species, and in the latter 
year was published a monograph on the genus Monticulipora by Prof- 
Nicholson. In this volume, by far the most valuable account of these 
fossils that has yet appeared, we have chapters giving the general history 
of Monticulipora and its allies, an accovint of the general structure of the 
genus and its development, a division of the genus into five sub-genera, 
with the characters of each, and detailed descriptions, with figures, of 
fortj'-three species, thirty-three of which are found in the immediate 
vicinity of Cincinnati. Finally Mr. E. O. Ulrich, began in 1882, in the 
fifth volume of the Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 
a series of articles entitled 'American Paheozoic Bryozoa, ' which was con- 
tinued through the sixth and into the seventh volume, 1884. Mr. Ulrich 
