324 Editorial Commeni. 
takes to show that all of the fossils in question are referable 
either to inorganic causes, or to tracks, trails, and impressions 
of organisms, or were graptolites. Thus, with one stroke, many 
generic and many more specific names are wiped out. Among 
these mistreated fossils are several tnideniable sponges, their 
spicular skeletons being known. It is therefore sad to think 
that such an interesting form as Walcott's Cyathophyciis sub- 
sphericMS should have to figure as a mud bubble! Most palaj- 
ontologists admit that some of the supposed marine plants of 
palaeozoic rocks may be the result of inorganic causes, but there 
are good reasons to believe that many, if not the majority, will 
be eventually classified with the spongida. 
In the October 1SS5 number of the same journal we find 
three small papers from his pen, each acting as a sword to lop 
off useless names. The first destroys our confidence in a fossil 
fungus which the venerable Leo. Lesquereux claimed to have 
discovered in the Coal Measures of Pennsylvania. The second 
expunges Ormatlchims and Walcottia., two names that their 
authors hoped might be useful. The third deals in like manner 
with LepidoUtes and uAiiomaloides^ two generic names proposed 
by Mr, Ulrich in 1S7S and 1879. Because the former has some 
outward resemblance to Ischadltes^ Prof. James concludes they 
must be the same, ignoring the fact that beyond the superficial 
appearance of the spicular plates there is no resemblance be- 
tv^^een them, Ischadites being built up very much upon the 
same plan as Rcceptaculites^ while Lepidolites consists solely 
of a thin integument of imbricating plates. That these peculiar 
bodies probably belong to the Receptaculitidce^ we freely admit, 
but they are not by any means the same as Ischadites. Atio?n- 
aloides he places as a synonym under Rcceptaculites. Despite 
frequent examinations of the types of that remarkable fossil we 
are unable to indicate its natural position, but it is simply ridic- 
ulous to identify it with RcceftaciiUtes, Not a single structural 
featui-e is common to them. 
His next venture we find in the January 1SS6 number, when 
he favors Ub with a revision of the cephalopoda of the Cincin- 
nati group. Before he undertook this work Cincinnati geolo- 
gists prided themselves upon having at least thirty-seven species 
and two varieties in their rocks, but again the useless ones are 
