^{page 242 note 1} Héb., et Desl. op. cit. p. 34.Google Scholar

^{page 242 note 2} Dundry Gasteropoda.

^{page 244 note 1} One of the evils of having too many names for slight varietal differences is illustrated in the tables of fossils given by Dr. Wright in his admirable and instructive paper on the Inferior Oolite of the South of England and of Yorkshire (Q. J. G. S. 1859); e.g. from the Humphresianus zone of Somerset the author quotes Chem. lineata, Sow. (p. 36), from the Grey Limestone (zone 3) of Yorkshire Chem. Scarburgensis, Lyc. and Mor. (p. 30), and from the Oolite Marl of Cheltenham Chem. procera, Deslong. (p. 13). What, I wonder, is the real biological distinction between these three? As a museum label for the cast of a Bajocian Chemnitzia in a grey matrix, probably Ch. Scarburgensis may continue to do duty.

^{page 246 note 1} See Corallian Gasteropoda, Mag., Geol. 1880, p. 393.Google Scholar

^{page 246 note 2} op. cit.

^{page 247 note 1} See below, p. 248.

^{page 248 note 1} Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 11.

^{page 248 note 2} Strong longitudinal ribs, straight or slightly curved, and but little decussated; an aperture, which, when one can see it, has a tendency to a slight channel in the front, but is otherwise Chemnitzoid; these features characterize the group of which several species are enumerated, and some new ones described by Tate and Blake in their Memoir on the Yorkshire Lias.

^{page 248 note 3} Some fossils lately discovered by the Survey in beds of presumed Lower Oxfordian age in Lincolnshire (on the horizon of the Scarborough Kelloway Rock perhaps) appear to represent the group.