^{page 458 note 1} Tenth Annual Report U.S.Geol. Survey, 1888–1889, p. 457.Google Scholar

^{page 459 note 1} With some exceptions, notably Mr. C. Davison, a consistent supporter of the theory of contraction.

^{page 461 note 1} According to Professor Penck foot.Google Scholar

^{page 464 note 1} “Ueber untersilurische Fische”: Mélanges Géol. et Paléont., vol. i (St. Petersburg, 1899), pp. 9–14.Google Scholar

^{page 465 note 1} Bulletin Geol. Soc. America, vol. iii (1892), pp. 153–171.Google Scholar

^{page 465 note 2} Traquair, R. H., “Report on Fossil Fishes collected by the Geological Survey in the Silurian Rocks of the South of Scotland”: Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. xxxix (1899), pp. 827–864.Google Scholar

^{page 465 note 3} Traquair, R. H.: Geol. Mag., 04, 1900.Google Scholar

^{page 467 note 1} To these I myself recently added a fourth, the Anaspida, for the remarkable Upper Silurian family of Birkeniidæ, but as these throw no light as yet on the problem of Descent they may at present be only mentioned.

^{page 469 note 1} Geol. Mag., 03, 1900.Google Scholar

^{page 469 note 2} “Die Entstehung der Landthiere”; Leipzig, 1891.Google Scholar

^{page 470 note 1} Read before the British Association, Section C (Geology), Bradford, Sept., 1900.

^{page 471 note 1} Read before the British Association, Section C (Geology), Bradford, Sept., 1900.

^{page 473 note 1} Read before the British Association, Section C (Geology), Bradford, Sept., 1900.

^{page 474 note 1} Exhibited and explained before the British Association in Section C (Geology), at the Bradford Meeting, September, 1900.