PALHONTOGRAPH. ‘AL SOCIETY. VOL XLI. BO Si te: 8 BuO NIG Eire Part II. PALMOZOIC PHYLLC-ODA. (PHYLLOCARIDA, Packar ) Part I. (CHERATIOCARID A. Paces 1—72; Puares I—XII. JURASSIC GASTEROPODA. Parr I, No. 2. (GASTEROPODA or raz INFERIOR OOLITE.) Paces 57—136; Prares I—VI. INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. Parr II. Paces 25—56; Prates VII—XIV. IssueD ror 1887. California Academy of Sciences = =< Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from California Academy of Sciences Library http://www.archive.org/details/monographof41188/pala PALAONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. VOLUME XIUl. CONTAINING FOSSIL SPONGES. Part II. By Dr.G.J. Hinpz. One Plate. PALAOZOIC PHYLLOPODA. Part I. By Prof. T. Rupert Jonzs and Dr. H. Woopwarp. Twelve Plates. JURASSIC GASTEROPODA. Part 1, No.2. By Mr. W. H. Hupteston. Six Plates. INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. Part II]. By Mr. 8.8. Buckman. Light Plates, ISSUED FOR 1887. JANUARY, 1888. THE PALASONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY was established in the year 1847, for the purpose of figuring and describing the whole of the British Fossils. Each person subscribing ONE GUINEA 7s considered a Member of the Society, and is entitled to the Volume issued for the Year to which the Subscription relates. Subscriptions are considered to be due on the First of January in each year. All the back volumes are in stock. Monographs which have been completed can be obtained, apart from the annual volumes, on application to the Honorary Secretary. Gentlemen desirous of forwarding the objects of the Society can be provided with plates and circulars for distribution on application to the Honorary Secretary, the Rev. Professor 'I'Homas Wiutrsuirg, M.A., F.G.S., 25, Granville Park, Lewisham, London, S.E. A List of completed Monographs ready for binding as separate volumes, will be found on page 22. The Annual Volumes are now issued in two forms of Binding: lst, with all the Monographs stitched together and enclosed in one cover; 2nd, with each of the Monographs in a paper cover, and the whole of the separate parts enclosed in an envelope. Members wishing to obtain the Volume arranged in the Larter FORM are requested to communicate with the Honorary Secretary. @ Lalis FE OF The Council, Secretaries, and {Members OF THE PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY ; AND I. A CATALOGUE OF THE WORKS ALREADY PUBLISHED ; II. A CLASSIFIED LIST OF THE MONOGRAPHS COMPLETED, IN COURSE OF PUBLICATION, AND IN PREPARATION, WITH THE NAMES OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AUTHORS ; II]. THE DATES OF ISSUE OF THE ANNUAL VOLUMES ; IV. a GENERAL SUMMARY, SHOWING THE NUMBER OF THE PAGES, PLATES, FIGURES, AND SPECIES IN EACH MONOGRAPH ; V. A STRATIGRAPHICAL LIST OF THE BRITISH FOSSILS FIGURED AND DESCRIBED IN THE YEARLY VOLUMES. Council and Officers elected 17th June, 1887. President. PROFESSOR SIR R. OWEN, K.C.B., F.R.S., GS. Vite-residents. Dr. A. Gerxte, F.R.S. | Sir A. C. Ramsay, LL.D., F.R.S. Pror, H. Atttyne NicnHotsoy, F.G:S. Dr. H. Woopwarp, F.R.S. Council. Rev. Pror. Bonney, D.Sc., F.R.S. J. W. Itort, Esq. S. 8. Buckman, Esq., F.G.S. H. Leg, Esa., F.L.S., G.S. J. Carter, Esq., F.G.S. W.C. Lucy, Esq., F.G.S. Dr. J. Evans, F.R.S. S. R. Pattison, Esa., F.G.S. Pror. Ftower, F.R.S. Dr. J. S. Puensé, F.G.S. C. H. Garry, Esa., M.A., F.G.S. Pror. Prestwicu, F.R.S. J. Hopkinson, Esa., F.G.S. Rev. H. H. Winwoop, F.G:S. W. H. Hup.teston, Esq., F.R.S. C. Trier, Esq., F.L.S., G.S. Treasurer. R. Ernenrrpes, Esaq., F.R.S., British Museum (Natural History), S.W. Honorary Secretary. Rev. Pror. T. Wiitsutre, M.A., F.G.S., 25, Granville Park, Lewisham, London. S.E. Rocal Secretaries. Bath—Rrv. H. H. W1xwoop, M.A., F.G.S. Hertfordshire—J. Hopkinson, Esq, F.G.S. Berlin—Mussrs. FrieDLANDER & Son. Keighley—A. BotToMLey, Esa. Birmingham—W. R. Huaues, Esq., F.L.S. Leicester—JAMES PuLant, Esa., F.G.S. Blackburn—D. Grvpes, Ese. Liverpool—G. H. Morton, Esgq., F.G.S. Cambridge—JameEs Carrer, Esa., F.G.S. Norfolk—Rerv. J. Gunn, M.A., F.G.S. Cheltenham—E. WETHERED, Esgq., F.G.S. North Devon—TownsEND M. Haut, Esq., F.G.S. Dudley—W. Mave ey, Esq. Oxford—Pror. Prestwicu, F.R.S., G.S. Durham—Rev. A. Warts, F.G.S. Paris—M. F. Savy. Edinburgh—T. Stock, Esq., F.G.8S.E. Roxburghshire—D. Watson, Esa. Glasgow—J. Tuomson, Esa., F.G.S. Torquay—W. PENGELLY, Esa., F.R.S., G.S. Gloucester—S. 8S. Buckman, Esa., F.G.S. Yorkshire—J. T. ATKINSON, Esy., F.G.S. LIST OF MEMBERS.* CORRECTED TO NOVEMBER, 1887. Her Most Gracious Masesty THE QUEEN. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, U.S.A. Adams, W. H. Esq., 6, Old Jewry. E.C. Adelaide Public Library, Australia. Adlard, J. E., Esq., Bartholomew Close. E.C. Agassiz, Alex., Esq., Cambridge, U.S.A. Albert Memorial Museum, Queen Street, Exeter. Ambhurst College, Mass., U.S.A. Anderson, Sir James, F.G.S., 62, Queen’s Gate. S.W. Asher and Co., Messrs., 13, Bedford Street, Covent Garden. W.C. Ashton-under-Lyne Free Library. Athenzum Library, Liverpool. Atkinson, J. T., Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, Church Yard, Selby, Yorkshire. Auckland, The Institute of, New Zealand. Australia, Acclimatization Society of. Backhouse, J., Esq., F.G.S,, West Bank, York. Balfour, Professor J. Bayley, D.Sc., Botanic Gardens, Oxford. Balme, E. B. Wheatley, Esq., Loughrigg, Ambleside. Balston, W. E., Esq., F.G.8., 7, Harrington Gardens. S.W. Barclay, E. F., Esq., F.G.S., 43, Augusta Gardens, Folkestone. Barclay, Joseph G., Esq., 54, Lombard Street. .C. Bardin, Mons. le Prof. L., Université d’Angers, Maine et Loire, France. Barke, F. Esq., Penton Villa, Stoke-upon-Trent. Barrow-in-Furness Free Public Library. Barthes and Lowell, Messrs., 14, Great Marlborough Street. W. Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution. Bather, F. A., Esq., F.G.S., 20, Campden Hill Road, Kensington. W. Becker, M. Edvald, Breslau, Silesia. Bedford, J., Esq., Woodhouse Cliff, Leeds. Bell and Bradfute, Messrs., 12, Bank Street, Edinburgh. * The Members are requested to inform the Secretary of any errors or omissions in this list, and of any delay in the transmission of the Yearly Volumes. Berthand, Prof., Faculté des Sciences, Lyons. Bewley, John, Esq., Central Buildings, North John Street, Liverpool. Bibliothéque de Ecole des Mines, Paris. Bibliothéque du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Bibliothéque du Palais des Arts, Lyons. Bibliothéque publique, Boulogne-sur-Mer, per Mons. C. Cougnacq, Conserv. Adjoints. Birkenhead Free Library. Birmingham Free Library, Ratcliff Place, Birmingham. Birmingham Natural History and Microscopical Society. Birmingham Old Library, Union Street, Birmingham. Blackburn Free Library. Blackmore, Humphrey P., M.D., Salisbury. Blake, W., Esq., Bridge House, South Petherton, Ilminster. Blanford, Esq., W. T., LL.D., F.R.S , Sec. G. S., 72, Bedford Gardens, Kensington. W. Blathwayt, Lieut.-Col. Linley, Eagle House, Batheaston, Bath. Bonissent, Monsieur, Clarentan. Bonney, Rev. Prof. T. George, D. Sc., F.R.S., 23, Denning Road, Hampstead. N.W. Bordeaux, La Faculté des Sciences de. Borradaile, Charles, Esq., East Hoathly, Uckfield, Sussex. Boston Society of Natural History, Boston, U.S.A. Bottomley, A., Esq., Local Secretary, 81, Devonshire Street, Keighley. Bradford Technical College. Brann, F., Esq., Connecticut, Ohio. Brassey, Lord, K.C.B., 24, Park Lane. W. Brenchley Trustees, Museum, Maidstone. Briggs, Miss Ellen, 55, Lincoln’s Inn Fields. W.C. Briggs, Wm. Milburn, Esq., 33, Wilkinson Street, Sheffield. Brighton and Sussex Natural History Society, Brighton. British Museum, Departmental Mineralogical and Geological Library. S.W. British Museum, Printed Book Department. W.C. Brown, H. I., Esq., 47, High Street, Burton-on-Trent. Brown, Isaac, Esq., Kendal. Brown, T. Foster, Esq., F.G.S., Guildhall Chambers, Cardiff. Buckman, S. S., Esq., F.G.S., &c., Local Secretary, The Kings, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire. Bus, J. S., Esq., Lund, Melksham, Wilts. Buxton, A. F., Esq., 5, Hyde Park Street. W. Cambridge University Library. Cambridge University Museum of Zoology. Campbell, Rev. J., M.A., F.G.S., M.R.A.S.E., Clontarf, Exbury Road, Catford. S.E. Cardiff Free Library. Carpenter, Dr. Alfred, Duppas House, Croydon. Carpenter, Dr. P. Herbert, F.R.S., &c., Eton College, Windsor. Carr, W. D., Esq., St. Edmonds, Silver Street, Lincoln. Carrick, Rev. J. L., M.A., Spring Hill School, Southampton. Carruthers, W., Esq., F.R.S., British Museum, Cromwell Road, S.W. Carter, James, Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 30, Petty Cury, Cambridge. Cash, Wm., Esq., F.G.S., Union Banking Company, Halifax. Cavell, Edmund, Esq., F.G.S., Saxmundham. Chadwick Museum, Bolton. Chapman, Thomas, Esq., 37, Tregunter Road, Brompton. S.W. Charterhouse School, Godalming. Cheltenham College, Bath Road, Cheltenham. Cheltenham Permanent Library, Royal Crescent, Cheltenham. Chester Society of Natural Science. Chicago, Library of. Christiania, Library of University of, Norway. Christ’s College, Cambridge, Library of. Clark, J. E., Esq., 9, Faversham Terrace, York. Clarke, Stephenson, Esq., F.G.S., Croydon Lodge, Croydon. Clifford, the Hon. and Rt. Rev. Bishop, Prior Park, Bath. Clifton College, Clifton, Bristol. Clough, C. T., Esq., F.G.S., Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. Cobbold, Rev. R. H., The Rectory, Ross, Herefordshire. Cochrane, C., Esq., Green Royde, Pedmore, uear Stourbridge. Colman, J. J., Esq., M.P., &c., Carrow House, Norwich. Colville, H. K., Esq., F.G.S., Linley Hall, Broseley, Shropshire. Copland-Crawford, Robert Fitzgerald, General, R.A., F.G.S., Sudbury Lodge, Harrow. Cornalia, Prof. Emilio, Milan. Cornell University, Ithica, U.S.A. Corporation of London, Library Committee of, Guildhall. E.C. Cotteau, Mons. Gustave, Auxerre. Cowan, Thomas W. Esq., F.G.S., R.M.S., Comptons Lea, Horsham. Craig, R., Esq., Langside, Beith, Ayrshire. N.B. Cross, Rev. J. E., F.G.S., Appleby Vicarage, Doncaster, Lincolnshire. Crosskey, Rev. H. W., LL.D., F.G.S., 117, Gough Road, Birmingham. Dale, H. F., Esq., Sutgrove, Miserden, Cheltenham. Darlington Public Library. Darwin, W. E., Esq., Ridgemont, Basset, Southampton. Davis, J. W., Esq., F.S.A., F.G.S., Chevinedge, Halifax. Dawkins, Prof. W. Boyd, F.R.S., G.S., Woodhurst, Wilmslow Road, Fallow Field, Manchester, Dawson, Sir W., LL.D., F.R.S., G.S., &c., McGill’s University, Montreal. Day, Rev. Hen. George, M.A., 55, Denmark Villas, West Brighton. Day, J. T., Esq., 12, Albert Square, Stepney. Deane, Henry, Esq., Gladesville, Sydney, N. S. Wales. Deighton, Bell, & Co., Messrs., Cambridge. Delgado, Signor J. F. N., Seccaé dos Trabathos geologicos, 118, Rua do Arco a Jesus, Lisbon. De Mercey Mons. M., Hyéres. Derby, Free Libraryand Museum. Derham, Walter, Esq., 2, Essex Court, Temple. E.C. Deslongchamps, Prof., Faculté des Sciences, Caen. Devas, Mrs. Anne, The Quarry Colwall, Great Malvern. Devonshire, Duke of, F.R.S., G.S., &c., Devonshire House, Piccadilly. W. Devon and Exeter Institution, Exeter. Dewalque, Prof., F.C.G.S., Liége. Dickinson, F. H., Esq., F.G.S., King Weston, Somerton, Taunton. Dickinson, W., Esq., F.G.S., 3, Whitehall Place, S.W. Dickson, Edw., Esq., 30, Easthaurne Road West, Birkdale, Southport, Lancashire. Digby, Lord, Minterne, Gerne Abbas, near Dorchester. Donald, Miss, 2, Eden Mount, Stanwix, Carlisle. Dorset County Museum Library, Dorchester. Dowson, E. T., Esq., F.R.M.S., Geldeston, Beccles. Dresden Nat. Society, Isis. Drew, Dr. J., F.G.S., Pembroke Lodge, Charlton Kings, Cheltenham. Ducie, the Earl of, F.R.S., G.S., &c., 16, Portman Square, W.; and Tortworth Court, Falficld, R.S.0., Gloucestershire. Dudley and Midland Geological and Scientific Society and Field-Club. Dundee Naturalists Society, Albert Institute, Dundee. Dunlop, R. Esq., Staurigg Oil Works, Airdrie, N.B. Durham, the Dean and Chapter of (by C. Rowlandson, Esq., the College, Durham). Edinburgh Geological Society, 5, St. Andrew Square, Edinburgh. Edinburgh Museum of Science and Art, Argyle Square, Edinburgh. Essex Field Club, A. Lockyer, Esq., Hon. Lib., Stanley Road, Woodford, Essex. Etheridge, R., Esq., F.R.S., G.S., &c., Treasurer, British Museum (Natural History), South Kensington. S.W. Eunson, J., Esq., F.G.S., 20, St. Giles Street, Northampton. Evans, John, Esq., D.C.L., F.R.S., G.S., Nash Mills, Hemel Hempstead. Eyre and Spottiswoode, Messrs., Great New Street. .C. Falconer, A. P., Esq., 18, Royal Crescent, Bath. Favre, Mons. Alph., Professor of Geology, Academy, Geneva. Feddon, F., Esq., F.G.S., Geological Survey of India. Firth College, Sheffield. Fletcher, Colonel T. W., M.A., F.R.S., G.S., S.A., Lawneswood House, Stourbridge. Florence, Gambinetto di Paleontologia, per Dr. Major. Flower, Prof. W. H., LL.D., F.R.S., British Museum, South Kensington. S.W. Fontannes, Mons. F., 4, Rue de Lyon, Lyon. Foulerton, Dr. J., 44, Pembridge Viilas, Bayswater. W. Fraser, John, Esq., M.A., M.D., F.R.C.S. Edin., Chapel Ash, Wolverhampton, Friedlander, Messrs., Local Secretaries, 11, Carlstrasse, Berlin. Fritsch, Prof. K. von, Halle. Fuller, Rev. A., Pallant, Chichester. Galloway, Rev. W. B., 82, Regent’s Park Road. N.W. Galton, Sir Douglas, K.C.B., F.R.S., G.S., &., 12, Chester Street, Grosvenor Place. S.W. Gardner, J. S., Esq., F.G.S., 7, Damer Terrace, King’s Road, Chelsea. S.W. Gatty, Charles Henry, Esq., M.A., F.G.S., Felbridge Place, East Grinstead. Gaudry, Prof., Membre de I’Institute, F.M.G.S., Muséum d’Histuire Naturelle, Paris. Geikie, Archibald, Esq., LL.D., F.R.S.L. & Ki., Vice-President, Director-General of the Geolo- gical Survey of the United Kingdom, Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. Geneva, Museum of Natural History. Geological Society of Manchester. Geological Survey of Ireland. Geologische Reichsanstalt, Vienna. Geologists’ Association, University College. W.C. Gibson, Mrs. Elizabeth, Saffron Walden. Gibson, Thomas F., Esq., F.G.S., &c., 10, Broadwater Down, Tunbridge Wells. Gilmour, M., Esq., 1, Kelgraston Road, Edinburgh. Glasgow Geological Society, 207, Bath Street, Glasgow. Glen, D. C., Esq., F.G.S., 14, Annfield Place, Dennistown, Glasgow. Godlee, Mrs., Whips Cross, Walthamstow. E. Goss, W. H., Esq., F.G.S., Stoke-on-Trent. Gosselet, Prof. J., F.M.G.S., Faculté des Sciences, Rue des Fleurs, Lille, France. Gongh, Viscount, F.G.S., L.S8., &c., Lough Cutra Castle, Gort, Galway, Ireland. Green, Prof. A. H., F.G.S., 15, Ashwood Villas, Headingley, Leeds. Gresley, W. S., Esq., F.G.S., Overseal, Ashby-de-la-Zouch. Groom, T. T., Esq., St. John’s College, Cambridge. Groves, Prof, J. W., F.R.M.S., King’s College, Strand. W.C. Gunn, Rev. J., M.A., Local Secretary, 82, Prince of Wales Road, Norwich. Hagen, B. B., Esq., Sway House, Lymington, Hants. Halifax Free Public Library. Hall, Hugh F., Esq., F.G.S., 17, Dale Street, Liverpool. Hall, Townshend M., Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, Orchard House, Pilton, Barnstaple. Hannah, R., Esq., F.G.S., 82, Addison Road, Kensington. W. Harford, Frederick, Esq., Ocean Marine Insurance Company, 2, Old Broad Street. E.C. Harker, Alfred, Esq., B.A., F.G.S., St. John’s College, Cambridge. Harley, Dr. John, F.L.S., 9, Stratford Place. W. Harmer, F. W., Esq., F.G.S., Oakland House, Cringleford, near Norwich. Harris, E., Esq., F.G.S., Rydal Villa, Longton Grove, Upper Sydenham, S8.E. Hartley Institution, Southampton, per T. W. Shore, Esq., F.G.S., Secretary. Haughton, Rev. Professor 8S., M.D., F.R.S., G.S., Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin. Hawick Public Library. N.B. Hawkins, Rev, H. S., Beyton Rectory, Bury St. Edmunds. Hawkshaw, J. Clarke, Esq., 18, Harrington Gardens, Gloucester Road. S.W. Hébert, Prof., F.M.G.S., Paris. Hedderley, J. S. Esq., Bulcote, near Nottingham. Heidelburg Library. Henderson, J. J., Esq., C.E., M.S.G.S., 5, Brunswick Square, Bristol. Hepburn, A. Buchan, Esq., Smeaton-Hepburn, Preston Kirk. N.B. Herdman, J., Esq., 18, Camden Crescent, Bath. Herdman, W., Esq., Westgate, Weardale, Darlington, Co. Durham. Heywood, James, Esq., F.R.S., G.S., &c., 26, Palace Gardens, Bayswater Road. W. Hill, Wm., Esq., jun., The Maples, Hitchin. Hind, Wheelton, Esq., 8, Wood House Terrace, Stoke-on-Trent. Hinde, Geo., Esq., Ph.D., F.G.S., Avondale Road, South Croydon. Hirst, John, Esq., Ladcastle, Dobcross, Saddleworth, near Manchester. Hood, Dr. Geo., Tow Law, via Darlington. Hopgood, James, Esq., Clapham Common. S.W. Hopkinson, John, Esq., F.L.8., G.S., Local Secretary, The Grange, St. Albans. Horen, Dr. F. Van, St. Trond, Belgium. Host, M., Copenhagen. Howse, H. G., Esq., M.S., F.R.C.S., 59, Brook Street, Grosvenor Square. W. Hudleston, W. H., Esq., F.R.S., Oatlands Park, Weybridge. 9 ~ 10 Hudson, Rev. R., M.A., 9, The Drive, Houghton, Brighton. Hughes, Prof, T. M‘K., F.G.S., &c., 4, Cintra Terrace, Cambridge. Hughes, W. R., Esq., F.L.S., Local Secretary, Wood House, Handsworth Wood, Birmingham. Hull, Prof. Edw., LL.D., F.R.S., &c., 14, Hume Street, Dublin. Hunt, J., Esq., Milton of Campsie, Glasgow. N.B. Hunter, J. R. S., Esq., LL.D., Daleville House, Carluke. N.B. Hunter, Rev. R., LL.D., M.A., F.G.S., Forest Retreat, Staples Road, Loughton, Essex. Huxley, Prof, T. H., LL.D., F.R.S., &c., Museum, South Kensington. S.W. Ilott, James William, Esq., Beechfield, Bromley, Kent. India, Geological Survey of. Ipswich Museum, Ipswich. Johnes, Mrs. and Miss, Dolan Cothy, Llandeilo, R.S.O., South Wales. Johnstone, Miss G. E., 105, Raton Squar.. S.W. Jones, Professor T. Rupert, F.R.S., G.S., &c., 10, Uverdale Road, King’s Road, Chelsea. S.W. Judd, Prof. J, W., F.R.S., &c., Harsleigh, Kew. Jukes-Browne, A. J., Esq., Geological Survey Office, 28, Jermyn Street. S.W. Keighley Mechanics’ Institute. Keith Public Library, Keith, Banff. N.B. Kendal Literary Institution, The Museum, Kendal, per S. Severs, Esq., Hon. Sec. Kilmarnock Library. King’s School, Library of, Sherborne. Kirkaldy Naturalists’ Society. N.B. Kirberger, W. H., Esq., Rokin 134, Amsterdam. Kirkby, J. W., Esq., Kirkland, Leven, Fife. Kirkland, Cope and Co., 4, Northumberland Street, Strand. W.C. Knowles, G., Esq., Moorhead, Shipley, near Leeds. Koebner, Herr W., Breslau, Germany. Langdale, Mrs. Catherine, The Grange, Stroud, Gloucestershire. Lausaune Musée Géologique, Switzerland. Leaf, C. J., Esq., F.G.S., Old Change, E.C.; and Cobham, Surrey. Leats, Dr., Beaufort Square, Chepstow, Monmouth. Lee, Henry, Esq., F.L.S., G.S., Renton House, 343, Brixton Road. S.W. Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society. Lefevre, Mons. T., 10, Rue du Pont Neuf, Brussels. Leicester Town Museum. Leighton, T., Esq., Lindisfarne, St. Julian’s Farm Road, West Norwood. Leipzig, Museum of. Lemarchand, Mons., Rouen. Linnean Society, Burlington House, Piccadilly. W. Lister, Arthur, Esq., Leytonstone. N.E. Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester. Literary and Philosophical Society of Newcastle, Westgate Street, Newcastle-on- Tyne. Literary and Philosophical Society of Sheffield. Literary and Philosophical Society of Whitby. ll Litton, Robert T., Esq., Sec. Geol. Soc., Australia; 17, Queen Street, Melbourne, Victorias Australia. Liveing, Professor G. D., M.A., Cambridge. Liverpool Free Pubiie Library. London Institution, Finsbury Circus. E.C. London Library, St. James Square. S.W. Lovén Professor S., Stockholm. Lubbock, Sir John W., Bart., M.P., F.R.S., L.S., &c., 15, Lombard Street. I.C. Luck, H. C., Esq., A.K.C., 70, Stamford Street. S.E. Lucy, W. C., Esq., F.G.S., Brookthorpe, near Gloucester. Lyell, L., Esq., F.G.S., 92, Onslow Gardens. W. Lyon, Bibliothéque de la Ville de. Lyons, Lieut. H. G., R.E., F.G.S., South Camp, Aldershot. Macadam, Prof. W. J., F.C.S., G.S.E., Surgeons’ Hall, Edinburgh. Mackenzie, G. W., Esq., 18, William Street, Lowndes Square. S.W. Mackeson, Henry B., Esq., F.G.S., &c., Hythe, Kent. Macmillan, Messrs., Cambridge. Madeley, W., Esq., Local Secretary, Dudley. Madras Government Museum (per Messrs. Williams and Norgate). Major, Charies, Esq., Red Lion Wharf, Upper Thames Street. E.C. Malton Field Naturalists’ and Scientific Society, Malton, Yorkshire. Manchester Free Library. Mansel-Pleydell, John, Esq., F.G.S., Whatcombe, Blandford, Dorset. Manzoni, Dr. Angelo, Ravenia. Marburgh, University of. Martin, Miss, Bredon’s Norton, Tewkesbury. Marr, J. E., M.A., F.G.S., St. John’s College, Cambridge. Mason Science College, Birmingham. Mason, P. B., Esq., Burton-on-Trent. Mathews, W., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., 60, Harborne Road, Birmingham. Maw, G., Esq., F.S.A., L.S., G.S., Benthall, Kenley, Surrey. Melbourne Public Library. Melvin, J., Esq., V.P.G.S.E., 48, Drumsheugh Gardens, Edinburgh. Mennell, H. T. Esq., F.L.S., The Red House, Croydon. Meyer, C. J. A., Esq., F.G.S., 8, Princes Gardens, Clapham Common. S.W. Middlesbrough Free Library. Millar, J., Esq., M.D., F.G.S., Bethnal House, Cambridge Road. HE. Milne-Edwards, Prof. A., Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Mitchell Library, Ingram Street East, Glasgow. Mitchinson, Rt. Rev. J., D.D., Asst. Bishop, Diocese of Peterborough, Rectory, Sibstone, Atherstone. Monks, Lieut.-Col. James, Aden Cottage, Durham. Mons, Museum of, Belgium, per Prof. C. A Houzeau, Ryon, prés Mons. Moore, J. Carrick, Esq., M.A., F.R.S., G.S., &c., 118, Eaton Square. S.W. Moore, Joseph, Esq., The Mount, Sevenoaks, Kent. Morison, Dr. J., F.G.S., Victoria Street, St. Albans. Morton, George Highfield, Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 122, London Road, Liverpool. Munich Royal Library. Museum of Practical Geology, Jermyn Street. S.W. 12 Nantes, Musée d’Histoire Naturelle de. National Library, Dublin. Neale, Edward Vansittart, Esq., 12, Church Row, Hampstead. N.W. Newcastle-apon-Tyne Public Library, Nicholson, Prof. H. Alleyne, F.G.S. (Vice-President), Marischal College, Aberdeen. N.B. Niven, Geo., Esq., F.G.S., Erkingholme, Coolhurst Road. N. Norfolk and Norwich Library, Norwich. Norman, Rev. A. M., Burnnoor Rectory, Fencelouses, Durham. Northampton Natural History Society. Nottingham Free Library. Nutt, D., Esq., Strand. WC. Oidham Free Public Library. Oldham, Mrs., 25, Stanley Gardens, Kensington Park. W. Omond, R. T., Esq., F.G.S.E., &c., Ben Nevis Observatory, Fort William, N.B. Oswestry Naturalists’ Field Club, Oswestry. Ormerod, G. W., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., &c., Woodway, Teignmouth. Ormerod, H. M., Esq., 5, Clarence Street, Manchester. Owen, Professor Sir R., M.D., LL.D., K.C.B., F.R.S., &c., President, Sheen Lodge, Richmond Park, East Sheen. S.W. Owens College, Manchester. Paisley Philosophical Institution. Parke, Geo. H., Esq., F.L.S., G.S., Barrow-in-Furness, Lancashire. Parker, J., Esq., F.G.S., Turl Street, Oxford. Pass, A. C., Esq., 15, Upper Belgrave Road, Durdham Down, Bristol. Pattison, S. R., Esq., F.G.S., 11, Queen Victoria Street. E.C. Paul, J. D., Esq., F.G.S., Regent Road, Leicester. Paynter, Rev. Samuel, 13, Bolton Street, Piccadilly. Peabody Institute, Baltimore, America. Peal, C. N., Esq., F.R.M.S., Fernhurst, Mattock Lane, Haling. Peckover, Algernon, Esq., F.L.8., Wisbeach. Peek, Sir Henry W., Bart., M.P., Wimbledon House, Wimbledon. S.W. Pengelly, William, Esq., F.R.S., G.S., Local Secretary, Lamorna, Torquay. Penruddocke, Charles, Esq., Compton Park, near Salisbury. Penton, Edw., Esq., F.G.S., 1, Mortimer Street. W. Peterborough Natural History, Scientific, and Archzological Society. Peyton, J. E. H., Esq., F.G.S., R.A.S., 5, Fourth Avenue, Brighton. Philosophical Society of Glasgow. Phear, Rev. George, D.D., F.G.S., Emmanuel College Lodge, Cambridge. Phené, John 8., Esq., LL.D., F.S.A., G.S., 32, Oakley Street, Chelsea. S.W. Piper, G. H., Esq., F.G.S., Court House, Ledbury. Plant, James, Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 40, West Terrace, West Street, Leicester. Player, J. H., Esq., Kent’s Green, near Worcester. Plymouth Institution, Library of. Poignaud, Dr. Malcolm, 145, Highbury New Park. N. Poynton, Rev. Francis, Rectory, Kelston, Bath. Portal, Wyndham S., Esq., Malshanger House, Basingstoke. Portsmouth Free Public Library. 13 Powrie, James, Esq., F.G.S., Reswallie, Forfar. Preston Free Library. Prestwich, Prof. Joseph, F.R.S., G.S., Local Secretary, Shoreham, near Sevenoaks, Kent. Price, F. G. H., Esq., 29, Weymouth Street, Portland Place. W. Pryor, M. R., Esq., Weston Manor, Stevenage, Herts. Quaritch, B., Esq., Piccadilly. W. Queen’s College, Belfast. Queen’s College, Cork (by Messrs. Hodges and Smith). Queen’s College, Galway. Queen’s College, Oxford. Queensland Museum. Radcliffe, James, Esq., F.G.S., 108, King Street, Dukinfield. Radcliffe Library, Oxford Ramsay, Sir A. C., LL.D., F.R.S., G.S., &e., Vice-President, 7, Victoria Terrace, Beaumaris. Ramsden, Hildebrand, Esq., 26, Upper Bedford Place, Russell Square. W.C. Reading Public Library and Museum. Reed, Dr. Frederick G., 46, Hertford Street, May Fair. W. Reynold, W., Esq., 74, King William Street. E.C. Rigby, S., Esq., Fern Bank, Liverpool Road, Chester. Roberts, Isaac, Esq., F.G.S., Kennessee, Maghull, near Liverpool, Lancashire. Roberts, Owen, Esq., M.A., F.S.A., 48, Westbourne Terrace. W. Roberts, R. D., Esq., M.D., D.Sc., F.G.S., Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge. Roberts, Thos., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge. Robertson, D., Esq., F.G.S., Fern Bank, Millport, N.B. Robinson, George, Esq., 8, Broad Street, Halifax, and Portalegre, Portugal. Rodrigues, Antonio Cesar, Esq., F.G.S., Castle Street, Edinburgh. Roemer, Professor F., University of Breslau, Silesia. Rogers, Rev. T. P., Vicarage, Batheaston, Bath. Roper, F. C. S., Esq., F.G.S., L.S., Palgrave House, Eastbourne. Ross, Dr. J. C., F.R.C.P. Edin., F.G.S., F.S.A. Scot., Shian Lodge, Penzance. Rothery, H. C., Esq., M.A., F.L.S., 94, Gloucester Terrace, Hyde Park. W. Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh. Royal College of Science for Ireland, Stephen’s Green, Dublin. Royal College of Surgeons, Lincoln’s Inn Fields. W.C. Royal Geological Society of Cornwall, Penzance. Royal Institution of Cornwall, Truro. Royal Institution of Great Britain, Albemarle Street. W. Royal Institution, Liverpool. Royal Institution of South Wales, Swansea. Royal Irish Academy, 19, Dawson Street, Dublin. Royal Microscopical Society, King’s College, Strand. W.C, Royal Society of Edinburgh. Royal Society of New South Wales. Royal Society of London, Burlington House. W. Rudler, F. W., Esq., F.G.S., Museum Practical Geology, Jermyn Street. Ruscoe, John, Esq., F.G.S., Ferndale, Gee Cross, near Manchester. Rutter, John, Esq., Ilminster. Rylands, T. G., Esq., F.1..8S., G.S., Highfields, Thelwall, near Warrington. 14. St. Helens Free Public Library, Town Hall, St. Helens. St. John’s College, Cambridge. St. Peter’s College, Cambridge. Salford Borough Royal Museum and Library, Peel Park, Manchester. Salt, S., Esq., Gateside, Silecroft, Cumberland. Sampson Low and Co., Messrs., Crown Buildings, 188, Fleet Street. E.C. Sanford, W. A., Esq., F.G.S., Nynehead Court, Wellington, Somerset. Saunders, James Ebenezer, Esq., F.L.S., G.S., 9, Finsbury Circus. E.C. Savy, Mons. F., Local Secretary, 77, Boulevard St. Germain, Paris. Scarborough, Philosophical Society of. Science and Art Department, South Kensington. S.W. Scientific Society, Midland Institute, Birmingham. Seguenza, Prof., Messina. Semple, Dr. Andrew, F.C.S.E., Caledonian United Service Club, Edinburgh. Seward, A. C., Esq., B.A., F.G.S., West Place, Lancaster. Sharpus, F. W., Esq., 30, Compton Road, Highbury. N. Sheffield Free Public Library. Sherborn, C. D., Esq., 40, King’s Road, Chelsea. Sidney Sussex College Library, Cambridge. Simpkin, Marshall, and Co., Messrs., Stationers’ Hall Court. E.C. Simpson, J. B., Esq., F.G.S., Hedgefield House, Blaydon-on-Tyne. Sladen, W. P., Esq., F.G.S., Orsett House, Ewell, Surrey. Slatter, T. J., Esq., F.G.S., The Bank, Evesham. Smith, B. Woodd, Esq., F.R.A.S., F.Z.S., Branch Hill Lodge, Hampstead Heath. Smith, Hubert, Esq., Belmont House, Bridgenorth, Shropshire. Smith, J., Esq., Stobbs, Kilwinning. N.B. Smith, R. M., Esq., F.R.S.E., G.S.E., 4, Bellvue Crescent, Edinburgh. Smith, Rev. Urban, Stoney Middleton. Smithe, Rev. F., LL.D., M.A., F.G.S., Churchdown, Gloucester. Society of Amateur Geologists, 31, King William Street. E.C. Somersetshire Archzological and Natural History Society, Museum, Taunton. Sorbonne Laboratoire de Géologie, Paris. Southport Free Library. South Shields Public Library. Spicer, Henry, Esq., jun., F.G.S., 19, New Bridge Street, Blackfriars. .C. Stanley, W. F., Esq., F.G.S., Cumbcrlow, South Norwood. S.E. Stebbing, Rev. T. R. R., M.A., Ephraim Lodge, The Common, Tunbridge Wells. Stirrup, Mark, Esq., F.G.S., High Thorn, Stamford Road, Bowdon, Cheshire. Stobart, W. C., Esq., Spellow Hiil, Burton Leonard, Yorkshire. Stock, Thos., Esq., F.G.S.E., Local Secretary, 16, Colville Place, Edinburgh. Stockholm Royal Library. Strahan, A., Esq., F.G.S., Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. Strangways, C. Fox, Esq., F.G.S., Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. Strickland, C. W., Esg., Hildenley, Malton. Stopes, H., Esq., F.G.S., Z.S., Kenwyn, Cintra Park, Upper Norwood. S.E. Sunderland Corporation Museum. Sunderland Subscription Library, Fawcett Street, Sunderland. Swanston, W., Esq., F.G.S., 50, King Street, Belfast. Swayne, H. J. F., Esq., The Island, Wilton, Salisbury. Sympson, T.. Esq., F.R.C.S., James Street, Lincoln. N.W. 15 Tasmania, Royal Society of. Taylor, Reuben, Esq., 82, Colmore Row, Birmingham. Taylor, 8S. Watson, Esq., Erlestoke Park, Devizes. Taylor-Smith, Dr. James, Thorpe Hall, Winston, Darlington. Tegima, S., Esq., Tokio Educational Museum, Japan. Thomson, James, Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 3, Abbotsford Place, Glasgow. Toronto University. Torquay Natural History Society, Museum, Babbacombe Road, Torquay. Trautschold, Dr., Moscow. Traquair, Dr. R. H., 8, Dean Park Crescent, Edinburgh. Trinity College, Cambridge. Turner, F. A., Esq., Free Library, Wolverhampton. Twamley, Charles, Esq., F.G.S., Ryton-on-Dunsmore, near Coventry. Twelvetrees, W. H., Esq., F.L.S., F.G.S., Lidjessy Mines, Province of Sivas, Asia Minor, care of Messrs. Huber and Co., Constantinople. Tyler, Capt. Chas., F.L.S., G.S., Elberton, New West End, Hampstead. N.W. University College, Gower Street, London. W.C. University of Bale, Switzerland. University of Edinburgh. University of Glasgow. University of Marsburgh. University of Wurtzburg. University of Syduey, New South Wales. University Library, Aberdeen. University Library, Leipzig. University Library, St. Andrew’s. Upton, C., Esq., 1, Great Winchester Street. E.C. Varty, Major Thos., Stagstones, Penrith. Vernon Park Museum, Stockport. Vicary, William, Esq., F.G.S., The Priory, Colleton Crescent, Exeter. Victoria Public Library, per S. Mullen, Esq., 48, Paternoster Row. E.C. Walcott, C. D., Esq., U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, United States, America. Walmstedt, Dr. L. P., Professor of Mineralogy, Upsala. Walford, E. A., Esq., F.G.S., 71, High Street, Banbury. Warburton, Thos., Esq., F.G.S., 11, Grange Road, Canonbury. N. Ward, Henry, Esq., F.G.S., Rodbaston, Penkridge. Wardle, Thos., Esq., F.G.S., St. Edward Street, Leek. Warrington Museum and Library. Warwickshire Natural History Society, Warwick. Watson, D., Esq., Local Secretary, Hillside Cottage, Hawick, N.B. Watson, Rev. R. B., B.A., F.R.S.E., F.L.S., F.G.S., F.C., Manse, Cardross, Dumbarton, Scotland. Watt, W. W., Esq., Broseley, Shropshire. Watts, Rev. Arthur, F.G.S., Local Secretary, The Bede College, Durham. Welsh, Major-General D. J., 1, Barton Terrace, Dawlish. Westermann, Messrs., New York. 16 Wethered, Edw., Esq., F.G.S., C.S., Local Secretary, 5, Berkeley Place, Cheltenham. Whidborne, Rev. G. F., F.G.S., Charanté, Torquay, Devon. Whitby Literary and Philosophical Society, Musenm, Whitby. Wight, G. P., Esq., 55, Hillmarton Road, Camden Road. N. Wild, G., Esq., The Bardsley Colliery Company, Bardsley. Williams, H. S., Esq., United States Survey, Ithaca, N. Y., United States, America. Williams and Norgate, Messrs., Henrietta Street, Covent Garden. W.C. Williamson, Prof. W. C., LL.D., F.R.S., The Owens College, Manchester. Willis and Sotheran, Messrs., Strand. W.C. Wiltshire, Rev. Prof. Thomas, M.A., Treas. G.S., F.R.A.S., L.8., Honorary Seerctary, 25, Granville Park, Lewisham, Kent. S.E. Winchester College Natural History Society. Winwood, Rev. Henry H., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 11, Cavendish Crescent, Bath. Witts, G. B., Esq., Hill House, Leckhampton, near Cheltenham. Wollaston, G. H., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., 24, College Road, Clifton, Bristol. Wolley-Dod, Rev. Charles, Edge Hall, Malpas, Cheshire. Wood, Henry, Esq., 10, Cleveland Square, Bayswater. W. Wood, Rev. Matthew T., Kington Vicarage, Herefordshire. Woodall, Major J. W., M.A., F.G.S., &c., St. Nicholas House, Scarborough. Woods, H., Esq., F.G.S., Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge. Woodd, A. B., Esq., Woodlands, Hampstead. N.W. Woodd, C. H. L., Esq., F.G.S., &c., Roslyn, Hampstead. N.W. Woodward, A. Smith, Esq., British Museum (Natural History), South Kensington. S.W. Woodward, Heury, Esq., LL.D., F.R.S., G.S., Vice-President, British Museum. S.W. Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge. Worcester Public Library and Hastings Museum. Wright, Joseph, Esq., F.G.S., 1, Donegall Street, Belfast. Wurzburg, the Royal University Library of. Yorkshire College of Science, Leeds. Yorkshire Philosophical Society Museum, York. Yule, Miss A. F., care of Messrs. Grindlay, 55, Parliament Street, Westminster. S.W. Zoological Society of London, 3, Hanover Square. W. §I. CATALOGUE OF WORKS ALREADY PUBLISHED BY THE PALZONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY: Showing the Oxver of publication; the Yuars during which the Society has been in Vol. L. Issued for the Year 1847 operation ; and the Contents of each yearly Volume. The Crag Mollusca, Part I, Univalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood, 21 plates. The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. I, Part I, Chelonia, &c., by Profs. Owen and Bell, 38 plates. The Eocene Mollusca, Part I, Cephalopoda, by Mr. F. E. Edwards, 9 plates. 1848 The Permian Fossils, by Prof. Wm. King, 29 plates. The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. I, Part II, Crocodilia and Ophidia, &., by Prof. Owen, 18 plates. The Fossil Corals, Part I, Crag, London Clay, Cretaceous, by Messrs, Milne Edwards L and Jules Haime, 11 plates. The Entomostraca of the Cretaceous Formations, by Mr. T. R. Jones, 7 plates. 1849 4 The Crag Mollusca, Part II, No. 1, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 12 plates. an The Mollusca of the Great Oolite, Part I, Univalves, by Messrs. Morris and Lycett, 15 plates. The Bese Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part III, No. 1, Oolitic and Liassic, by Mr. Davidson, plates. The Reptilia of the Cretaceous Formations, by Prof. Owen, 39 plates. 1851 fie Fossil Corals, Part II, Oolitic, by Messrs. Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, 19 plates. The Fossil Lepadide, by Mr. Charles Darwin, 5 plates. ( The Fossil Corals, Part III, Permian and Mountain-limestone, by Messrs. Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, 16 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part I, Tertiary, by Mr. Davidson, 2 plates. 1852 ¢ The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part II, No. 1, Cretaceous, by Mr. Davidson, 5 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part III, No. 2, Oolitic, by Mr. Davidson, 5 plates. The Hocene Mollusca, Part II, Pulmonata, by Mr. F. EH. Edwards, 6 plates. L The Radiaria of the Crag, London Clay, &c., by Prof. E. Forbes, 4 plates. f The Fossil Corals, Part IV, Devonian, by Messrs. Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, 19 plates. | The Fossil Brachiopoda, Introduction to Vol. I, by Mr. Davidson, 9 plates. 1853 3 The Mollusca of the Chalk, Part I, Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe, 10 plates. The Mollusca of the Great Oolite, Part II, Bivalves, by Messrs. Morris and Lycett, 8 plates. [ The Mollusca of the Crag, Part II, No. 2, Bivalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 8 plates. The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part I, Chelonia, by Prof. Owen, 9 plates. * The Volume for the year 1849 consists of two separate portions, each of which is stitched in a paper cover, on which are printed the dates 1848, 1849, and 1850. The one portion contains ‘ Cretaceous Entomostraca’ and ‘ Permian Fossils ;’ the other, ‘ London Clay Reptilia,’ Part II, and ‘ Fossil Corals,’ Part I. 3 18 CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part II, No. 2, Cretaceous, with Appendix and Index [ to Vol. I, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part II, Dinosauria, by Prof. Owen, 20 plates. The Mollusca of the Great Oolite, Part III, Bivalves, by Messrs. Morris and Lycett, 7 plates. ; The Fossil Corals, Part V, Silurian, by Messrs. Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, 16 lates. The Fossil Balanide and Verrucide, by Mr. Charles Darwin, 2 plates. The Mollusca of the Chalk, Part II, Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe, 6 plates. The Eocene Mollusca, Part III, No. 1, Prosobranchiata, by Mr. F. EH. Edwards, 8 plates. The Mollusca of the Crag, Part II, No. 3, Bivalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 11 plates. The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part III, by Prof. Owen, 12 plates. The Hocene Mollusca, Part III, No. 2, Prosobranchiata, continued, by Mr. F. EH. Edwards, 4 plates. The Mollusea of the Chalk, Part III, Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe, 11 plates. The Tertiary Entomostraca, by Mr. T. R. Jones, 6 plates. The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part I, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. | Vol. VIII. Issued for the Year | The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part II, by Dr. Wright, 12 plates. *1854 mieG ms +1855 The Fossil Crustacea, Part I, London Clay, by Prof. Bell, 11 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part IV, Permian, by Mr. Davidson, 4 plates. op OS ” 1856 4 The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 1, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part IV (Supplement No. 1), by Prof. Owen, 11 plates. The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. I (Supplement), by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part III, by Dr. Wright, 14 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 2, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. The Reptilia of the Cretaceous Formations (Supplement No. 1), by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations (Supplement No. 2), by Prof. Owen, 8 plates. The Polyzoa of the Crag, by Prof. Busk, 22 plates. The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part IV, by Dr. Wright, 7 plates. The Eocene Mollusca, Part III, No. 3, Prosobranchiata continued, by Mr. F. HE. | Edwards, 6 plates. » XII. ” 1858 1 The Hepa of the Cretaceous Formations (Supplements No. 2, No. 3), by Prof. Owen, plates. [ The Reptilia of the Purbeck Limestones, by Prof. Owen, 1 plate. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 3, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 10 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Part V, No. 4, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 20 plates. 1859 J The Reptilia of the Oolitic Formations, No. 1, Lower Lias, by Prof. Owen, 6 plates. 1 The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay, No. 1, by Prof. Owen, 1 plate. L The Eocene Mollusca, Part IV, No. 1, Bivalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood, 13 plates. { The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 5, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 1860 ” XI. ” 1857 py 2SIDOL The Reptilia of the Oolitic Formations, No. 2, Lower Lias, by Prof. Owen, 11 plates, ; The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay, No. 2, by Prof. Owen, 1 plate. | The Fossil Estherie, by Prof. Rupert Jones, 5 plates. L The Fossil Crustacea, Part II, Gault and Greensand, by Prof. Bell, 11 plates. ee Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. II, Part I (Asteroidea), by Dr. Wright, 138 1861 » SIV. 3 plates. Supplement to the Great Oolite Mollusca, by Dr. Lycett, 15 plates. The Fossil Hchinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part I, by Dr. Wright, 11 plates. The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part I (Devonian and 4 Silurian), by Mr. J. W. Salter, 6 plates. 5 2\VLE 8 1862 1 The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part V1, No. 1, Devonian, by Mr. Davidson, 9 plates. The Eocene Mollusca, Part IV, No. 2, Bivalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 7 plates. L The Hele oF the Cretaceous and Wealden Formations (Supplements), by Prof. Owen, plates. The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part II, by Mr. J. W. Salter, 8 plates. » XVII. » 1863 5 The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VI, No. 2, Devonian, by Mr. Davidson, 11 plates. The Belemnitide, Part I, Introduction, by Prof. Phillips. The Reptilia of the Liassic Formations, Part I, by Prof. Owen, 16 plates. pp OSV op * This Vol. is marked on the outside 1855. } This Vol. is marked on the outside 1856. tg CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. II, Part II (Liassic Ophiuroidea), by Dr. Wright, 6 plates. The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part III, by Mr. J. W. Salter, 11 plates. The Belemnitidz, Part II, Liassic Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 7 plates. The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part I, Introduction, Felis spelza, by Messrs. W. Boyd Vol. XVIII. Issued for .| Dawkins and W. A. Sanford, 5 plates. L Year 1864 Title-pages, &c., to the Monographs on the Reptilia of the London Clay, Cretaceous, and Wealden Formations. The Crag Foraminifera, Part I, by Messrs. T. Rupert Jones, W. K. Parker, and H. B. Brady, 4 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part I, Tertiary, by Dr. Duncan, 10 plates. The Fossil Merostomata, Part I, Pterygotus, by Mr. H. Woodward, 9 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 1, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 12 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part IV, No. 1, Liassic, by Dr. Duncan, 11 plates. The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part IV (Silurian), by Mr. 0-0: Gd + 1866 4 J. W. Salter, 6 plates. fare Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 2, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 10 plates. The Belemnitide, Part III, Liassic Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 13 plates. ( Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part I, by Mr. E. W. Binney, 6 plates. | Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part IV, No. 2, Liassic, by Dr. Duncan, 6 plates. The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part II, by Dr. Wright, 14 plates. 5p) XL 1867 4 The Fishes of the Old Red Sandstone, Part I, by Messrs. J. Powrie and E. Ray | Lankester, 5 plates. The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part II, Felis spelea, continued, by Messrs. W. Boyd Dawkins and W. A. Sanford, 14 plates. iS | Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part II, No. 1, Cretaceous, by Dr. Duncan, 9 plates. c | I 1» XLX.* i 1865 The Fossil Merostomata, Part II, Pterygotus, by Mr. H. Woodward, 6 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 3, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 15 plates. The Belemnitidx, Part IV, Liassic and Oolitic Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 7 plates. The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay, No. 3, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part III, Felis spelea, concluded, with F. lynx, by : Messrs. W. Boyd Dawkins and W. A. Sanford, 6 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part II, No. 2, Cretaceous, by Dr. Duncan, 6 plates. The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part III, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. The Belemnitide, Part V, Oxford Clay, &c., Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 9 plates. The Fishes of the Old Red Sandstone, Part I (concluded), by Messrs. J. Powrie and aa 1868 LIL 1869 H. Ray Lankester, 9 plates. The Reptilia of the Liassic Formations, Part II, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. The Crag Cetacea, No. 1, by Prof. Owen, 5 plates. ( The Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part II, by Mr. E. W. Binney, 6 plates. | The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part IV, by Dr. Wright, 10 OV, 1870 4 plates. The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 4, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 13 plates. [ ine Kocene Mollusca, Part IV, No. 3, Bivalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 5 plates. The Fossil Mammalia of the Mesozoic Formations, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. { The Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part III, by Mr. E. W. Binney, 6 plates. The Fossil Merostomata, Part III, Pterygotus and Slimonia, by Mr. H. Woodward, 5 plates. Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, Part I (Univalves), by Mr. S. V. Wood, with an Introduction on the Crag District, by Messrs. 8. V. Wood, jun., and F. W. * Harmer, 7 plates and map. 1 oe ay 1871 4 Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Iguanodon), No. IV, by Prof. Owen, 3 plates The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part IV, Felis pardus, &c., by Messrs W. Boyd Dawkins and W. A. Sanford, 2 plates. | The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part V, Ovibos moschatus, by Mr. W. Boyd Dawkins, L 5 plates. * These Volumes are issued in two forms of binding; first, with all the Monographs stitched together and enclosed in one cover; secondly, with each of the Monographs separate, and the whole of the separate parts placed in an envelope. The previous Volumes are not in separate parts. 20 CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part III (Oolitic), by Prof. Duncan, with an Index [ to the Tertiary and Secondary Species, 7 plates. ; | The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part V, by Dr. Wright, 5 plates. Vol. XXVI* Issued for the | The Fossil Merostomata, Part IV (Stylonurus, Hurypterus, Hemiaspis), by Mr. H. Year 1872 Woodward, 10 plates. L The Fossil Trigoniz, No. I, by Dr. Lycett, 9 plates. ( The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol I, Part VI, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. | Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part I (Tertiary and Cretaceous), by MF ed Gas MEL eae (Bivalves), by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 5 plat Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, Part ivalves), by Mr. S. V. Wood, 5 plates. ERVIN) on 4 Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Iguanodon), No. V, by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. [ Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Hyleochampsa) No. VI, by Prof. Owen. The Fossil Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, Part I, by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. ( The Post-Tertiary Entomostraca, by Mr. G. 8. Brady, Rev. H. W. Crosskey, and Mr. | D. Robertson, 16 plates. ee VILE, 1874 4 The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part I (Cypridinade), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones and Messrs. J. W. Kirkby and G.S. Brady, 5 plates. The Fossil Trigoniz, No. II, by Dr. Lycett, 10 plates. The Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part IV, by Mr. EH. W. Binney, 6 plates. The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part VII, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. The Fossil Trigoniz, No. III, by Dr. Lycett, 8 plates. The Fossil Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, Part II, by Prof. Owen, 20 plates. » XXIX* cf 1875 (The Carboniferous and Permian Foraminifera (the genus Fusulina excepted), by Mr. | H. B. Brady, 12 plates. ; a. XXX* 1876 J Supplement to the Fossil Prnchiopods, Vol. IV, Part II, No. 1 (Jurassic and Triassic), 2 : 2 by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. | Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Poikilopleuron and Chondrosteosaurus), L No. VII, by Prof. Owen, 6 plates. Supplement to the Hocene Mollusca (Bivalves), by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 2 plates. The Fossil Trigoniz, No. IV, by Dr. Lycett, 13 plates. XXX1* 1877 The Eocene Mollusca (Univalves), Part IV, by Mr. S. V. Wood, 1 plate. a ; a The Carboniferous Ganoid Fishes, Part I (Paleoniscide), by Dr. Traquair, 7 plates. The Fossil Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, Part III, by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. l The Fossil Elephants (EH. antiquus), Part I, by Prof. Leith Adams, 5 plates. ( The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part VIII, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. Index and Title Page to the Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I (Echinoidea), by Dr, Wright. The Fossil Merostomata, Part V (Neolimulus, &c.), by Dr. H. Woodward, 6 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part II, No. 2 (Jurassic and Triassic), 1878 4 by Mr. Davidson, 15 plates. ; The Lias Ammonites, Part I, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. The Sirenoid and Crossopterygian Ganoids, Part I, by Prof. Miall, 6 plates. Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Goniopholis, Petrosuchus, and Sucho- saurus), No. VIII, by Prof. Owen, 6 plates. L The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part A (Preliminary Treatise), by Prof. Boyd Dawkins. mp SOQ AUG oy ¢ The Eocene Flora, Vol. I, Part I, by Mr. J. S. Gardner and Baron Ettingshausen, 5 plates. ! Second Supplement to the Crag Mollusca (Univalves and Bivalves), by Mr. S. V. Wood, 6 plates. 1879 2 The Fossil Trigoniz, No. V (Conclusion), by Dr. Lycett, 1 plate. The Lias Ammonites, Part II, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Goniopholis, Brachydectes, Nannosuchus, Theriosuchus, and Nuthetes), No. IX, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. L the Fossil Elephants (E. primigenius), Part II, by Prof. Leith Adams, 10 plates. 51 2 OO-GU ES * These Volumes are issued in two forms of binding ; first, with all the Monographs stitched together and enclosed in one cover ; secondly, with each of the Monographs separate, and the whole of the separate parts placed in an envelope. 21 CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. ( The Eocene Flora, Vol. I, Part II, by Mr. J. S. Gardner and Baron Ettingshausen, 6 plates. | The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. II, Part III (Asteroidea and Ophiuroidea), by Dr. Wright, 3 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part III (Permian and Carboniferous), by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. | The Lias Ammonites, Part III, by Dr. Wright, 22 plates. The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. II, Part I (Chelone) by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. ( The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part IX, by Dr. Wright, 6 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part [IV (Devonian and Silurian, from Budleigh-Salterton Pebble Bed), by Mr. Davidson, 5 plates, eaaxyY 1881 The Fossil Trigoniz (Supplement No. 1), by Dr. Lycett. The Lias Ammonites, Part IV, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. The Reptilia of the Liassie Formations, Part III (Conclusion), by Prof. Owen, 13 plates. The Fossil Elephants (HE. primigenius and H. meridionalis), Part III (Conclusion), L by Prof. Leith Adams, 13 plates. The Hocene Flora, Vol. I, Part III (Conclusion), by Mr. J. S. Gardner and Paron Ettingshausen, 2 plates. Third Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, by the late Mr, 8. V. Wood, 1 plate. The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part X (Conclusion), by Dr. Wright, » SXXVI* x 1882 5 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part V (Conclusion), by Dr. Davidson. Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, Part I (Devonian and Silurian), by Dr. Davidson, 7 plates. The Lias Ammonites, Part V, by Dr. Wright, 22 plates. ( The Eocene Flora, Vol. II, Part I, by Mr. J. 8. Gardner, 9 plates. The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part V (Conclusion), by the late Mr. J. W. Salter. Vol. XXXIV* Issued for the Year 1880 % The Carboniferous Trilobites, Part I, by Dr. H. Woodward, 6 plates. OS Ee # 1883 : Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, Part IL (Silurian), by Dr. Davidson, 10 plates. | The Fossil Trigonize (Supplement No. 2), by the late Dr. Lycett, 4 plates. The Lias Ammonites, Part VI, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. f The Eocene Flora, Vol. II, Part I, by Mr. J.S. Gardner, 11 plates. The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part I, No. 2 (Conclusion), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones, Mr. J. W. Kirkby, and Prof. G. 8. Brady, 2 plates. Poe VILIF 1884 { The Carboniferous Trilobites, Part II, by Dr. H. Woodward, 4 plates. Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, Part III (Conclusion), by Dr. Davidson, 4. plates. L The Lias Aaamasnites) Part VII, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. The Eocene Flora, Vol. II, Part III (Conclusion), by Mr. J. S. Gardner, 7 plates. The Stromatoporoids, Part I, by Prof. Alleyne Nicholson, 11 plates. 3 MAXTX* 1885 1 The Fossil Brachiopoda (Bibliography), Vol. VI (Conclusion), by the late Dr. Davidson and Mr. W. H. Dalton. The Lias Ammonites, Part VIII (Conclusion), by the late Dr. Wright, 1 plate. ( The Morphology and Histology of Stigmaria Ficoides, by Prof. W. C. Williamson, 15 plates. XL* 1886 The Fossil Sponges, Part I, by Dr. G. J. Hinde, 8 plates. ” ” The Jurassic Gasteropoda, Part I, No. 1, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston. The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, Part I, by Mr. 8. 8. Buckman, 6 plates. The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part VI, by Prof. Boyd Dawkins, 7 plates. The Fossil Sponges, Part II, by Dr. G. J. Hinde, 1 plate. XLI* 1887 The Palzozoic Phyllopoda, Part I, by Prof. T. R. Jones and Dr. Woodward, 12 plates. a2 B The Jurassic Gasteropoda, Part I, No. 2, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston, 6 plates. Inferior Oolite Ammonites, Part II, by Mr. S. S. Buckman, 8 plates. * These Volumes are issued in two forms of binding; first, with all the Monographs stitched together and enclosed in one cover ; secondly, with each of the Monographs separate, and the whole of the separate parts placed in an envelope. § Il. LIST OF MONOGRAPHS Completed, in course of Publication, and in Preparation. 1. MONOGRAPHS which have been Comp.ierep, and which may be bound as separate Volumes :— The Morphology and Histology of Stigmaria ficoides by Prof. W. C. Williamson. (Complete with Title-page and Index in the Volume for 1886.) The Eocene Flora, Vol. I (Filices), by Mr. J. 8. Gardner and Baron Ettingshausen. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1879, 1880, and 1882. Title-page, Index, and directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for 1882.) The Eocene Flora, Vol. II (Gymnosperme), by Mr. J. S. Gardner. (Complete in the Volumes for 1883, 1884, and 1885. Title-page, Index, and directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for 1885.) The Carboniferous and Permian Foraminifera (the genus Fusulina excepted), by Mr. H. B. Brady. (Complete in the Volume for the year 1876.) The Tertiary, Cretaceous, Oolitic, Devonian, and Silurian Corals, by MM. Milne-Edwards and J. Haime. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1849, 1851, 1852, 18538, and 1854. The Title-page and Index, with corrected explanations of Plates XVII and XVIII, will be found in the Volume for the year 1854.) The Polyzoa of the Crag, by Mr. G. Busk. (Complete with Title-page and Index in the Volume for the year 1857.) The Tertiary Echinodermata, by Professor Forbes. (Complete with Title-page in the Volume for the year 1852.) The Fossil Cirripedes, by Mr. C. Darwin. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1851, 1854, and 1858. The Title-page will be found in the Volume for the year 1854, and the Index in the Volume for the year 1858. The Post-Tertiary Entomostraca, by Mr. G. 8. Brady, the Rev. H. W. Crosskey, and Mr. D. Robertson. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1874.) The Tertiary Entomostraca, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. (Complete, with Title-page and Indez, in the Volume for the year 1855.) The Cretaceous Entomostraca, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1849.) The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part I (Cypridinade and their allies), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones, Mr. J. W. Kirkby, and Prof. G.S. Brady. (Complete in the volumes for 1874 and 1884. The Title-page and Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1884.) The Fossil Estheriz, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1860.) The Trilobites of the Cambrian, Silurian, and Devonian Formations, by Mr. J. W. Salter. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1862, 1863, 1864, 1866, and 1883. The Title- page and Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1883.) 23 The Fossil Merostomata, by Dr. H. Woodward. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1865, 1868, 1871, 1872, and 1878. The Title-page and Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1878.) The Fossil Brachiopoda (Tertiary, Cretaceous, Oolitic, and Liassic), Vol. I, by Mr. T. Davidson. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1850, 1852, 1853, and 1854, The Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1854, and corrected Title-page in that for 1870.) The Fossil Brachiopoda (Permian and Carboniferous), Vol. II, by Mr. T. Davidson. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1856, 1857, 1858, 1859, and 1860. The Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1860, and corrected Title-page in that for 1870.) The Fossil Brachiopoda (Devonian and Silurian), Vol. III, by Mr. T. Davidson. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1862, 1863, 1865, 1866, 1868, and 1870. The Title-page and Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1870.) The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, by Dr. T. Davidson. Supplements: Tertiary, Cretaceous, Jurassic, Triassic, Permian, and Carboniferous. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1873, 1876, 1878, 1880, 1881, and 1882. The Title-page and Index, with directions for the binding will be found in the Volume for the year 1882.) The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, by Dr. T. Davidson. Supplements: Devonian and Silurian. Appendix to Supplements, General Summary, Catalogue and Index of the British Species. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1882, 1883, and 1884. The Title-page, with directions for the binding will be found in the Volume for 1884.) The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. VI, by Dr. T. Davidson and Mr. W. H. Dalton. Biblio- graphy. (Complete in the Volume for the year 1885.) The Eocene Bivalves, Vol. I, by Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-page and Indeza, in the Volumes for the years 1859, 1862, and 1870. The directions for the binding will be found in the Volume for the year 1870.) Supplement to the Eocene Bivalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-paye and Index, in the Volume for the year 1877.) The Eocene Cephalopoda and Univalves, Vol. I, by Mr. F. E. Edwards and Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1848, 1852, 1854, 1855, 1858, and 1877. The Title-page, Index, and directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1877.) The Mollusca of the Crag, Vol. I, Univalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood. (The Text, Plates, and Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1847, and the Title-page will be found in the Volume for the year 1855.) The Mollusca of the Crag, Vol. II, Bivalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1850, 1858, 1855, 1858, and 1873. The Title-page will be found in the Volume for the year 1873, and the Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1855, and a Note in the Volume for the year 1858). The Mollusca of the Crag, Vol. III, Supplement, by Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1871 and 1873. The Title-page and Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1873.) Second Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, by Mr. 8. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1879.) Third Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, by Mr. 8. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1882.) 24 The Great Oolite Mollusca, by Professor Morris and Dr. Lycett. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1850, 1858, and 1854. The Title-paye and Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1854.) The Fossil Trigonie, by Dr. Lycett. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1872, 1874, 1875, 1877, and 1879. The directions for the binding will be found in the Volume for the year 1879.) Supplement to the Fossil Trigoniz, by Dr. Lycett. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1881 and 1888. The Title-page, Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1883.) The Oolitic Echinodermata, Vol. I, Echinoidea, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858, and 1878. Title-page, Index, and directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1878.) The Oolitic Echinodermata, Vol. II, Asteroidea, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1861, 1864, and 1880. Title-page, Index, and directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1880). The Cretaceous Echinodermata, Vol. I, Echinoidea, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes | for the years 1862, 1867, 1869, 1870, 1872, 1873, 1875, 1878, 1881, and 1882. The Title-page and Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1882.) The Cretaceous (Upper) Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1858, 1854, and 1855, but wants Title-page and Index.) The Lias Ammonites, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1878, 1879, 1880, 1881, 1882, 1883, 1884, and 1885. The Title-page and Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1885.) The Fossils of the Permian Formation, by Professor King. Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1849. Corrected explanations of Plates XXVIII and XXVIII* will be found in the Volume for the year 1854.) The Reptilia of the London Clay (and of the Bracklesham and other Tertiary Beds), Vol. I, by Professors Owen and Bell. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1848, 1849, 1856, and 1864, Directions for the binding, Title-page, and Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1864.) The Reptilia of the Cretaceous Formations, by Prof. Owen. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1851, 1857, 1858, 1862, and 1864. Directions for the binding, Title-page, and Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1864.) The Reptilia of the Wealden and Purbeck Formations, by Professor Owen. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1853, 1854, 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858, 1862, and 1861, Directions for the binding, Title-pages, and Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1864.) The Reptilia of the Liassic Formations, by Professor Owen. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1859, 1860, 1863, 1869, and 1881. Directions for the binding, Title-pages, and Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1881.) The Fossil Mammalia of the Mesozoic Formations, by Professor Owen. (Complete, with Title- page and Table of Contents, in the Volume for the year 1870.) The Fossil Elephants, by Professor Leith Adams. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1877, 1879, and 1881. Directions for the binding, Title-page, and Index will be found in the Volume for the year 188). 2. MONOGRAPHS in course of Pusiication :-—t+ The Eocene Flora, by Mr. J. 8. Gardner. The Fossil Sponges, by Dr. G. J. Hinde. The Crag Foraminifera, by Messrs. T. Rupert Jones, W. K. Parker, and H. B, Brady. The Stromatoporoids, by Prof. H. Alleyne Nicholson. Supplement to the Fossil Corals, by Dr. Duncan, The Jurassic Gasteropoda, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston. The Paleozoic Phyllopoda, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones and Dr. H. Woodward. The Trilobites, by Dr. H. Woodward. The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, by Mr. 8S. 8. Buckman. The Belemnites, by Professor Phillips.* The Sirenoid and Crossopterygian Ganoids, by Professor Miall. The Fishes of the Carboniferous Formation, by Prof. Traquair. The Fishes of the Old Red Sandstone, by Messrs, J. Powrie and E. Ray Lankester, and Professor Traquair. The Reptilia of the Wealden Formation (Supplements), by Professor Owen. The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay, by Professor Owen. The Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, by Professor Owen. The Pleistocene Mammalia, by Messrs. Boyd Dawkins and W. A. Sanford. The Cetacea of the Crag, by Professor Owen. 3. MONOGRAPHS which are in course of PREPARATION :—t The Fossil Cycadee, by Mr. W. Carruthers. The Rhizopoda of the Chalk, Chalk Marl, Gault, and Upper Greensand, by Messrs. T. Rupert Jones, W. K. Parker, and H. B. Brady. The Foraminifera of the Lias, by Mr. H. B. Brady. The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part II (Leperditiade), by Messrs. T. Rupert Jones, J. W. Kirkby, and G. S. Brady. Supplement to the Tertiary and Cretaceous Entomostraca, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. The Wealden, Purbeck, and Jurassic Entomostraca, by Messrs. T. R. Jones and G. S. Brady. The Cretaceous Mollusca (exclusive of the Brachiopoda), by the Rev. Prof. T, Wiltshire. The Purbeck Mollusca, by Mr. R. Etheridge. The Rhetic Mollusca, by Mr. R. Etheridge. The Silurian Fish Bed, by Dr. Harley. * Unfinished through the death of the Author, but will be continued by Mr. R. Etheridge. + Members having specimens which might assist the authors in preparing their respective Monographs are requested to communicate in the first instance with the Honorary Secretary, 26 § Ili. Dates of the Issue of the Yearly Volumes of the Paleontographical Society. Volume I for 1847 was issued to the Members, March, 1848. 3 II ,, 1848 Bs Be July, 1849. 55 Ill ,, 1849 a as s, August, 1850. a IV ,, 1850 ae 3 a June, 1851. a5 BV wiesa sl Sbil = oe “7 June, 1851. = Wale. al soe 35 ys ms August, 1852. Bi VII ,, 1853 os % us December, 1853. 55 VIII ,, 1854 53 ni re May, 1855. 53 IX ,, 1855 oe 3 - February, 1857. 55 x, 15, kono » - April, 1858. as XI ,, 1857 PA 5 * November, 1859 a XII ,, 1858 oP = = March, 1861. 39 KITE 5, . 1859 55 p ss December, 1861. a; ATV (33, 11860 ss HH a May, 1863. 33 KVirog (186L % Ee is May, 1863. 3 XVI 5 41862 oP es 2 August, 1864. 3 XVII ,, 1863 a 55 5 June, 1865. 3) VOT S64 55 53 53 April, 1866. 5 KT 4. S65 7 Pe a5 December, 1866. a KX. 5; 21866 5 on 3 June, 1867. BS XXI_ ,, 1867 aS > 5 June, 1868. PA xXxii-",, 186s 9 5 9 February, 1869. 55 XLT Ge T869 Ay 3 ‘ January, 1870. i Ve, 61870 S 55 re January, 1871. 5 KEV! 5, 871 a is Ns June, 1872. a RE 8 1872 rs A a October, 1872. 7 SXVIL ,, 1873 a th a5 February, 1874. a OVE 5) S74 > Pr oF July, 1874. os XXIX ,, 1875 33 “3 a December, 1875. = DOK 1876 ss 5 December, 1876. Be OVER MST: AA a - February, 1877. ye) PROS A'S7S iB is 53 March, 1878. ae ROR E879 if e a May, 1879. Bef PERE Vs TSBO 3 -* As May, 1880. Ln ROK VSS 5 #, “A May, 1881. Sy Oe Vi S82 af - ei June, 1882. kK VE 55. 1883 ae of A October, 1883. »XXXVIII ,, 1884 5 Bs a December, 1884. 5p. OE. SS 1885 3 - oF January, 1886. 5 XL ,, 1886 s e PF March, 1887. oF Kh 1887 - 5 5 January, 1888. 27 68ST €0¢8 6§ TéT 461 8ST 18 PLE LG 9LT 9g S&Z PET sTs TS 9S vs O0GE SIT 6111 cs GES YOCT PCL vP PPL rat T*9 6F1 L6L 4618 008 > Z8T 69 99¢ &P TT og Lee 9T TPT 1g OOP &@ ESE T 16 yon 019 | “Dire sonny MT P2Qtosep | paydeasonqvy saadg Joon Joon ‘IIA an ors éL 9T 9€ ‘ydersou0 py yar ut 80}¥][q JO ‘ON ~A FE6E GL 6&T s6 ITP PL LES G96 LéT 068 L0Z 16h 6& SPT GEG 907 €&1 99T 8L 881 LPT 6ST 48 99 “ydersou0y yore ut ssaad.oqyary Jo sastg Jo ‘ON “Al ““davVMaOr CAIAAVOH 888T Z88T uoreduon fo as4noo uz ‘prempoom “FI ‘Aq pus souor gaodny ‘Jorg Aq ‘epodol[Ayg o10z0weg ony, €98T O98T ENE TTT THON SOMO qradny “Jorg Lq ‘eoyysy [880g OTT, PSST PLS PSST PLBI cease, Cop eps eNO eR RU Sar I que “Apoig "g 9) ‘Jorg pus Xqyiry MM “¢ ‘sIssop, pus souor qaodny ‘Jorg Aq “wovysomojuUy snosezimoqreD eq], OS8T 678T “eres eeemrrrowrrovrrs TI TTAWOO ‘souor qlodny ‘Jorg Aq ‘vovaysoul0ju snosovyeI4 OTT, Lg81 ScsT EEN’ TI TT ITTION Soup qtodny ‘yorg &q ‘vovsysomozugq Arerys9y, OUT, DDO COD COC OSC ODOCOCUDOOO SOC DIC CLICICCCOOC COC UC LOCOCO OC DOEOC OOOO OOOCOCOOOOC ONC OGOOTOCUCO OCC OOOCNOCONCrG TLATAWOO “nos PL8T PLT “qoqoyy "Cl “IT pus ‘Aeyxssorg +My “HY ‘Aoy ‘Apeaq gy ‘apy Aq “vovaysomoqug Ares07,-380g ONL, SL8T ‘ZL8T ‘ZLST ‘698T ‘998T|8Z8T ‘SL8T ‘TL8T ‘898T “S98T PH OOE ORE eee ee meee ee eee mee eee eee eEE eeE Est eeeese ALLTAWOO ‘prvmpooM “FH “Iq Aq “ejeutoqsossyY [Isso OT, TOST “SS8T ‘TS8T DEG8T “PSST ‘TSST Pee ere ee ee er ri FLATANMOD ‘urmaeg *O ‘ayy Aq ‘sopodraary pissog ony, Z881 ‘TSST ‘SL8T ‘SL8T FLST |Z88T ‘T8ST ‘S481 ‘SL8T ‘EZ8T ‘ELST ‘TLST ‘OLST ‘S98T ‘FOBT |‘ZZ8T ‘OL8T ‘698T ‘L98T ‘Z98T HEP OO meee eee eee eee eeeeeeses eet oeseeenes ALLTAWOO {TOA “4ystyy “iq Aq “vyeutsspouryoy snosovya1Q oY], BERTHS E OOO eee eee EEE EH OOO HEE HOE OE SEH OEE HEH OOOO EES OEE Eeeeee O88T ‘998T ‘E98T O88T ‘POST ‘T98T HLATANOO ‘TT [OA f e SL8T ‘TOST “6S8T ‘8CQT “‘1E8T. SST ‘8cgT ‘1G8T ‘9S8T ‘ecgl ee eee eee ee eee eee ee ee erry (2) ALGTAWOO J TOA “Vy SILA Iq kq “eqeullopourgogq dITTOO ouL SSS ZcSI NERO e meee meee eee eree rer een teres eer eeereseesee® aLaTaAWoO ‘soqio,q ‘Jolg kq “eyeuapouryoy Are1y419 J, o1L 6S81 LS8T wollen leenea)tieninielssesin sisi eiceseesinesecesecueseeccovecnsee oor amTOO ‘ysngq Pong /\t kq ‘Beig 243 jo vozk{og ouL ZL8T ‘OL8T ZL8T “698T ee sereeesesessesssssses worgaidmoa fo asinoo ur ‘uvoung ‘Jorg Aq ‘s[etog [Isso,q oy} 0} yuomeddng “698T “S98T “L98T “998T ‘Q98T “LO8T ‘998T ‘S98T leroy | POST EERO ee HEHE HET He HEH OO Hes ET ORH HEHE EH OORT HH EHH ODE HE HHO EE HEE EEE EEE EHS O RHEE HEE EEE EEE OES (7) ALATANOO ‘Quire yy “EG8T ‘CSS “TS8T ‘OS8T ‘EG8T ‘SST “ISST ‘6FST {. f pues spivapq-eup “WI Aq ‘syer0D uermpig pue ‘uvtuoAeq ‘o191[0Q ‘snosdujerg ‘ArerQJ07, 988T SSsT seeeeceececescuseeccreressesss WO2297CU00 JO aSinod U2 ‘UOs[OyoINT eUAeTTY “Forg Aq ‘sprosodojemosyg oy, 9Z8T 9L8T seorevesesceseoseseececeortatamoo ‘Aperg ‘gq ‘H ‘ayy Aq ‘vsosrurmeto,y uvimseg pus snodteytmoqrey oy, CORPO REET EH EHH O OEE HEHEHE EEEOOE EEE EEE EEE OEE HEHEHE DEH EHH OE EEE E ERE HEE SESH SHOOT SOT HOS ESE SHEESH SOE EES uoyajduoa fo eee mee Atenas wm ‘Kpeag ‘g "Fy pue ‘aoyreg “y ‘Ay ‘souor yaodny ‘gy, ‘sassopy Aq “esostutoresoy, Svap ony, S88T ‘L88T L881 ‘988T terenseaseneaeseccrsseessccoscsrererses*"-uora;duon fo asinoa ue epuiy ‘f ‘H ‘Iq Aq ‘sesuodg [Issog oy J, GLST “CLS ‘TL8T ‘898T GL8I “TL8T ‘OL8T ‘L98T. sreseesessssees wovzaidwmoa fo asinoa we ‘Kouurg “My “Way Aq “vqvayg snosezTMOgaeD oY} JO BAOLT OTT, Q88T ‘FS8T “E88T GS8T “FS8T “E8sT seeeeesecorereress TT TTEWOO TT JOA “louprey “gp cape Aq “ C ‘UeSnBYSsUIy{y UoIvg puv JoupIeyH ‘g “fF ‘apy Aq ‘eAOL,y OMA00m oN, Z88T ‘O88T “6L8T ZS8T ‘O88T “ELST reereseeee rT TaMOO “T "TOA 1881 988I 89) TETTAMOO MOSMIRITIIM “OM Jorg Aq ‘saprooy viavmsyg yo ASojoystyy puv ASojoydaoyy ony, “paystiqnd sea Ydeisouoyy 9173 YoyN Ut SIKAK IY} JO saqyeq. “We TIT *panssi sem qdeisou0 yy ot} SurMIeyU0D SUINJOA 9T]} yorym sof sivaX IY} JO sayeq “11 “HdVaNONOW FO LOaraas ‘sydvuhouopy quasafiip ayy us paquiasap savoads pun ‘saunby ‘sagmd ‘sabod fo vaqunu ayy ‘swunjoo bumoyof puv HIMnOd ay7 wr pun £ (awns auz burpug 0g apmb v sv) ydnshouopy wmjynoywmd yava winzuoa yorym sawnjoa hyawah ayg ‘wunjoo ANOOAS 242 Ww ‘MOYeTduI0D Jo esanod sy7z we wo ‘ayatduIod ag peysygnd ojsaypy ydvshouopy yave 4ayjayn WWNYOD LSUIA ay, un buamoys ?(888T ‘AUMVONVE 07 dn) sudaNapy TNL OL aqossl SHAVENONOW ANE JO AUVNWAG * AI § a 28 9LIT ~o996—s |" @UVMBOA AATHAVO a0 EEE EE Eee a nee Pee Pete oe tien ee — pesnerssvannsaaateegseatiscortaesnasneseneee uoyapduoo fo osanoo us ‘dung “jor £q, sonrumoajeg eu, Q88T “PSST ‘ESsT C88I “PSST ‘E88 sbindnacoBadondcoo Goo Bou CHGNTDOotiods Gadandadnascocanonead0ne US sac &q “go{tuOUULY oIsserT ot L01 98 16 gos _ | G8ST“ISST ‘08ST ‘6ZST ‘S48T|ZS8T ‘TS8T‘ 0881 ‘LSI ‘881 poem ee AAS SCL Peg tmounn Omsserd Ohh GI POL VL 9g 888T ‘L881 L88T ‘988T rireserssesreresssess worradumon Jo asinoa u2 ‘uvmyong ‘g *g “AW Aq ‘sopuomUY 04100 LoMoyuy oy, Sv L106 9 9&1 888T ‘Z88T L881 “9881 trrererseereerreseerrerees wonganduoa fo a8inoo w2 “UoysoTPUH “H “AM “AW Aq ‘epodosoysvy oysseane ou, F6L Lge CI 621 €98T T981 see eeneeeeeseeesssseeseasesesensesesess TMT IWO) ‘qq00 Ar aq kq quomoddng “ “ “ 61¥ 9P8 0& 686 GOST “ES8T ‘OS8T PS8T ‘ES8T ‘OS8T sresensecenecereenesenreeseseees seer TA TAWOO “4700Ar] “AC, Puy sitio “Jorg Aq “wosnqpoy F190 Fwary oy og 99 Z a4 LLST LLST tee sevcceescoorTTaWOO ‘J [OA *(soayealg) poom “A ‘S “AT fq ‘eosnyjoyy eusv0g ay} 03 yuowalddng P61 TS SZ 81 TZ8T ‘F98T ‘T98T OL8T “Z98T “6S8T sreseeeesrecesrenccreveenseeseeeeetTITaNOO T TOA “POOM*A’S “IN Aq ‘seaqearg ‘vasnqjoyy ous00g ou, L181 ‘T98T LLST ‘8981 PU ome epode TLATAWOO J TOA “poo G1e GZ9 las 198 ‘LG8I “GSS ‘ZS8T ‘6PST ‘SG8T ‘PSST ‘ZS8T ‘SPST | \-, -g ayy Sq ponurquoo ‘sprempy “gq “T's Aq ‘soayearuy pur vpodopeydan ‘vosnqjow oue00g oy y, SL 62 I iw Z88L Z88L Pee reeeeroeeeeeereeee ALAYTAWOO “ TII ‘ON “ce “ GES LIS 8T CS 6Z8TI “PL8T “CL8T 6L8T ‘EL8T ‘TZ81 seeseseeeeeerroervers mTTTaWOO ‘poom ‘A “SAN Aq ‘TT pues T ‘ON “vosnqfoyy Sva—y oyg 07 syuomoddng €oZ 169 Tg PPE TOSI ‘ZE8T1 ‘ES8T ‘TS8T 28S8T elcTod f ‘ECCT “OS8T see e neces eve see vecenceesccevescssccsesccsccscccessssssassasesesesererees HF THT TH) «(soaqearq ) ‘Tl ‘JOA VVG 18S 1Z 91Z LESL ‘SPST QSG8I ‘LFST decceveceuseeeeessoeseeecssessssssasatseseseesesesenseassessesssesesesem TT TOD (saayeatug) ‘TOA —:poom ‘A ‘9 “Ay Aq ‘Svr_Q oy} Jo vosn]jow oyy 46 eg - 61 @88T ‘TSst €88T ‘IS8T siseevaueeeeeeenssercoeenrsecsessosecssovesss TrmTaWOO qqaokry ‘aq Aq ‘ermosity, [Isso,7 ey} 07 yuomajddng cIL OPP IP OFZ GL8T ‘LL8T ‘SL8T ‘FL8T ZL8T 6L8T ‘FLT ‘SL8T ‘FL81 L831 esevenesccccccccvececccssssesoveresescsescvesscoooovecssoeeeees OT TATTWOO ‘qna0 kT Iq kq ‘euo0siy, [Isso UL — — —— 89L 988T SSsST eee eeececeeeecereceereressserserogerssoeesssers WAT TWO) ‘Kydvarsorqrg ‘TA ‘IOA “ “ gt SéIL 12 OLY PBT ‘E88T ‘Z88T PSST “EST ‘Z88T Vesereroeseerees HIBTaWOO “UBLINTIg puv uvmuoaeg, ‘syuomeyddng “A “10 e s @88T “1881 ; 8ST ‘T1881 Ties eens ALTTAWOO ‘snosesruoqavg 07 Arwrqsoy, ‘syuomeyddng “AT “1A se “ GTS POOL ai €8& ‘O88T ‘SZ8T ‘948T *FZ8T O8ST ‘84ST ‘9Z48T “ELST TEST (6081 ‘ £ LST ‘898T ¢ [eer ALLTAWOO ‘epodorpovig uvlIntIg puv uvMoAed oY, “TIT “1°A es ce 12é 991 0 82S “LOB8T ‘998T “S98T ‘F98T Q98T ‘GOST “E98T “OST €98T O98T proodi “epod aymoqiey pus uviutldeg OUT, “II ‘1OA a cc LST 6061 6s Tes ‘TORT TOST “6S8T ‘BS8T | “6S81 ‘SSSI “ZEST ‘P9SsT Bauman) spodormoesgy mmozeyruods8) Puy wetued see eeeoeeeeneesorseesooessressvvessseseeesor TATINOO ‘UOSpIAv] +L “IN ogTt SS8T ai 60P GOST “EST ‘ZeST ‘TS8T FSST “ESS ‘ZEST ‘OSST kq ‘epodomovig orssery pure ‘orq1[0Q ‘snoeovze.t;) ‘Kaviqey eT ‘I TOA “epodorovrg [issog oy, nicleclnlewals ere ln sjeueje\eceiele(s/aleiele 8inieiels/na\e|sieine\aj@iaie.e,0(ejece)siuisivia/s)ejseie.e) ties) o.e)ciaice uorajzduos fo asdnoa un Tea oF "JOIg kq 08 a1 eG 88 8981 ‘8ST O98T ‘9¢8T leer pus “qin ‘AvjQ uopuory ey} JO esory} SZuistadmo0o) vaovysnty snoovijysoov[eyy oly, 1g 8yT oT 98 PSST “ESS PSST ‘E88 seeveseaeenseesaeeverserseeeseeererserses! TEMTAWOO ‘PAvBMpoom “H “AC Aq ‘seqiqopy], snoswoFuoqaey oy, FIL €0L 18 PES ERST ‘LIST ‘99ST ‘GOST ‘FIST/ESST ‘99ST ‘FORT ‘E98T ‘ZOST| ALATAWOO “109 "SM “LAIN kq ‘suoyeursog UvTHOAI PUL “UBLINIIG “UvIIGMIE O47 JO SE}GOTMY, Oy, 68ST €0¢8 ors PEGE | aavMuUOA LHNAOUG : "SMIPOOM JO} «ders “ydeaZon0y 3 d / aes : uy poqeaoee | Pus sauna | ovo ut |e aes fae ae HaVUDONOW 40 Lomraas satoads jo “ony | POUT MIPONT | saqeta 30 “ON WTO | — youyn uy IVI ay} JO Sze yoryn 4of sxvaX OY} Jo 89yvC “LIA ae “A nodvd 70 oN “um IIL ‘IL sie ‘panurzuoo—(S88T ‘KUVONVE 7 dn) SUASWAPT AHL OL ATASSI SHAVADONOJT AHL JO AUVNNWAS 29 SUOMVOLIO,T 1410 Jo vrpydayy , jaqvt epis}jno uo poyacyy || “Koyeredos puy oq Leu Jo “ounjoA FORT OY} UI punog aq [ITAL xopuT pun sosed-ayry, t “SuIpUlq OF sUOTJOAAIP puv saSud-ajq14 survquoD wu ‘sotoods Mou jo soqep or} Surysttquqzso 10g [Jos w JOA SLQT UI punoy aq [IM Xepuy 7 “uorzeortqnd jo asinoo ut Mou st guemolddng y ¥ *pouoxoor ATUO sotoads ysiqyag 2 *peuoyoor ATUO satoods ysiqag *painsy jou 4nq ‘paqitosap ae soroods o13 Jo Auvyy & ‘quomotddng £ *S04U[q JO SUOIJIOIOD OMT, 2 “UVIULIIT 94} SUIB}UOD p “BOSNT[OP[ BvaQ 04 ajoN 2 *soATVAlUy) 0} aSud-apqIy, g *xopul » Sa a ce D €0Org 986'8Z LI91 OLY TI ee eee eee “TVLOY, 0s L¥G v SIL TZ81 OL8T Tee eemem en eew ensure seeecersoreress TLATAWOO UIMG ‘Jorg Aq ‘suUCTyVULIO,T VIOZUsET Ot] JO VI[BUIUIV IY AIT, L881 988L | SRY SeP aeEie Paie ie te ak o ea ee uorarduoa ér OFS 68 ees ‘SSI ‘ZL81 ‘698T ‘S98T 998T|‘S48T ‘TZ8T 8981 ‘L981 F98T| | fo asunoo ua ‘paojueg -y *y pue suryucg phog *M ‘sassoyy Aq “erpeMUMEP_ oUD004SIO[q NLT, & 916 86 G96 TS8I “6L8T ‘L281 UTS8T ‘“6L8T ‘L181 sereeeunneceececoerrcsrceseuseecssceesesceresecerroeerTTTAWOO ‘SMBpY WHET ‘Jorg Aq ‘syuvydory |ssog ou, L €F g OP OL8T 698T seeeeeececceececeesereeceuererersecessrrereeesersss 1072970UL00 JO aS.N09 U2 ‘HOMO ‘Jorg Aq ‘“Ba0¥49D SvAD ot J, AT SOT ¥G 146 LL8T ‘GL8T “FL8T LL8T “SL8T ‘EZ81 seesreeeessseseseeces woudarduod fo asinoo U2 ‘UEMG ‘Jorg Aq ‘SUOIwUMAO,, OTOZOSaW OT} FO wIpI4doy at T, T88T UTS8T potiod0c61000000 Sse oLeou05099000000000 ‘ 02 91% og PLT ‘OLS “S98T ‘E98T ‘T98T | “69ST “e9sT ||‘o98T II*6s8T } TLATINOO “waaO yor Aq ‘suoywmsogy oysseyT oy} JO VIA OL § &% 9 9T 698T “E98T ‘T98ST 898T “O98T “6S8T “eeess* worgaqdiuoa fo asinoo uz AMG ‘Jorg fq ‘uoywuIog AvIQ oSprroumry oy} Jo vipydoy oy, ST CLT 1Z 18 6L8T ‘8L8T ‘9L8T ‘PLST ‘ZLST/GZ8T ‘SL8T 9481 ‘S48T‘TZ8T) ot worgagdiuoa fo asinoa us (syuametddng) suornems0g ueplvaA, 043 Jo wITIydey ou, POST ‘TOST ‘“6S8T ZOBT ‘8S8T ‘LE8T | eae + ‘ * hal MiUODIES A oud TO BITadesy ot Al 14 29 est ‘SSS ‘L981 ‘Ses ‘eset | ‘9S8T ‘SSSI ‘PSST ‘essT SEE ge) rd gee Or Sento peta PU MOP pe M OFF JO MEHCPe ONL 9% 61g 6S FST POST ‘TOSI ‘“6S8T ‘TS8T Z9ST ‘8S8T ‘LST ‘TS8T sereeneesseccesevessersserereseeers tr TTTIWOO UIM( ‘Jorg Aq ‘suoywuUI0y snosovjory 944 Jo BIIQdoxy ot, I b 3 b 08st O8ssT “** worgazduoa fo asimoa w ‘ued ‘Jorg Aq “I Wd “TI OA s ‘ ; é . ; CECB OO GORI OOOO IS GOO Kt a a, COO) 7 ‘TOA TPA pus LiGyv@) 68 ve 89 OST 6S8T OS8T '6FST JOSBT ‘6YST ‘881 { ‘syorg Aq ‘[spog Arerqaay, 10430 pus uvyso[yourg oy} Jo puv] Av[Q wopuoy oy jo vyydey oy, PERO OOOO EHR H REET H HEHEHE COE EEE SEES EEE HE EHS SEES ESSE THEE EHH HHH OOS HEE HED HEHEHE ESE EESHEHESSHHH EES OR EH OH HOE uorjazdmoo ¢ € 1 S61 I 69 OL8T '898T 698T LOST fo asimoo uw “ioysoyuvy Avy “q pue olamog ‘f ‘sassopy Aq ‘ouoyspuvg poy PIO 24} JO Soysty OY, S 8¢ L 09 LL8T ZL81 tereseeeesenes worsazduon fo asinoo ur ‘arenbery, “aq Aq ‘MOTyeUIO, SNOLeFTUOGIH OY} JO SOUS OUT, 9 19 9 ZE SL8T SL8T POO eee mee eee eee ee een cer eee ees senses resets ees uouajduoa fo asinoo 7) TRU ‘Jorg kq ‘sprouvy) plouadig ouL 8éT IIgs 66 L836 SS8T ‘OS8T aPS8T ‘6PST rereseesssusousurcouereccesessoneescorsess FLATAMOO ‘Jury “Jorg Aq ‘uoywus0,y UvyULIag OY} JO STIssoy OT, 62 6T€ LZ 49 LG8T ‘GSST “ecsT GOST “PSST “ES8T teeeerensecuereeessreuesssecssssesseesecrmrrmT a Woo ‘adavyg ‘qd “ay Aq “epodoreydap snosovjzorp s0eddg oy, PIGF 6L2'SS 9LIT $S96 ‘““quyMuod LHNNOUG “4x97, 9 “SNOPOOM JO) -ndesg *ydeaZonoyy 3 d . renal , ut THOM See: x Beek fine BY eau 8PM a Ae ee am Bre Sigua ARR am HdVaNONOW AO LoaraaAs satoadg Joon Pen eecOUy eT 894¥[q JO “ON Regt ae HOO Yyoryn 2 SILVA IY} JO Sajyeq yarn sof s1v9X IY} Jo sazeq “ITA 30 oN a poindae on alana Sr 1 ‘panutjuoa—(ggst ‘KMVONVE 9 dn) SUTENT AHL OL AAASSI SHAVADONOP AHL AO AUVWWAG 30 § V. SrratiGRAPHICAL TABLE exhibiting the Bririsu Fossits already figured and described in the ANNUAL VoLuMmEs (1847—1887) of the PALZONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. PROTOZOA. RADIATA. ARTICULATA. B a Ho mn . e n . Lio} J (4) =] 7, F S o a 3S mn -3 Ss $ n 3 is} Sy 8 lg + Se 3 Se | eye | 8 ic 3% ala | £ | 8e # & |SS|F| & e 28 co} Ay cst Pa | ce a S = A IPleistocenek cseccallecoee lines lee ll eee, Sil Mecca oe le cee 1874 Demet esses: | .. | 1865 | 1849 1852 | { 3854 fisza}y | |1880) | 1882 1849 1851 Race Ms cast ly cee) hece ht eae 1852 He } Lapse eel eee wll Race 1884 1885 1862 1867 1869 1849 ree 1851 Cretaceous......... ree are wee 1868 W849") ec || weaeee A Wewsleos es 1873 1854 1875 1878 | 1881 1882 Wealden ..... evoulewcotlll see ws bo | sando0s (Ih Adoods ... |1860 1855, 1856, i 1851) | | 1857, 1858, Moliticiiessce.sesee 1872 1861, 1878, 1851 ... 11860 1880 1851) | (1855, 1856, Wiagsio’ .acanks: ve] ce | ace [41866 $14 1858, 1861, 1867 1864. Triassic ............ andl eae ie ob 'SSOms ul ieeeesess ... |1860 1849] 1849 Permian ... ..... |1849| 1849 ieee ieee 149m" 1 1849 |1860 r|1867 Siricnee em 1887| 1876 | 1852 { 1874 {1860/1872 || i993 1984 wee | 1875 eeeeee =F nee eee 1884 1887 1878 > 1886 1865 . 1853 1868 Devonian’ 40. Pail i887 |i. eee Ae tn) GA Mr. J. A. Strahan, F.G.S., who has lately surveyed the district, has included them as part of this latter division ; whilst Mr. G. H. Morton, F.G.8.,* regards them as Carboniferous Sandstone. Neither of these geologists recognised the organic nature of the rock. Mr. Strahan has described the chert as “‘ probably a siliceous sediment of extreme fineness,” and Mr. Morton regards the strata as originally of sandstone, which has been, for the most part, converted into chert. Microscopic sections of the chert collected from the different outcrops show the presence of the same spicules as in the Yorkshire beds, and that this remarkable series of chert rocks are built up of the integrated skeletons of siliceous Sponges. As a rule, the spicules in these Flintshire cherts are not so favorably preserved 1 ¢ Geology of Yorkshire,’ part ii, p. 66. 2 “Mem. of the Geol. Survey, Explanation of Quarter-Sheet 79 N.-W..,’ p. 18. 3 Op. cit., p. 18. 4 «Proce. Liverpool Geol. Soc.,’ vol. iv, pt. v, 1882-3, p. 393. GEOLOGICAL DISTRIBUTION. 101 as those of the Yorkshire beds, but the same forms of Hyalostelia and Renera can be recognised in them. At the head of the Gwydfyd Valley, on the Great Orme’s Head, there are portions of broken-up beds of white and bluish cherty rocks, which have been described by Mr. George Maw, F.L.S.,’ and estimated by him to be about 50 feet in thickness. They apparently belong to the series above the Carboniferous Limestone ; the fragments are filled with spicules, principally minute acerates, similar to those in the beds at Gronant. ScortanD.—The beds which have yielded the remarkable series of Sponge remains in Ayrshire, belong to what is known as the Upper-Limestone and Lower- Limestone series of the Scotch geologists, which are situated beneath the Millstone- grit, and thus on the horizon corresponding to the Yoredale series of Yorkshire and North Wales, in which Sponge-beds are so largely developed. In Ayrshire, however, the Sponge-remains” have principally been obtained from decayed material in the joints and fissures in the limestone, and in soft, siliceous clays infilling irregular cavities in the same rock. Mr. John Smith, of Kilwinning, has supplied me with the following list of localities in Ayrshire which have yielded Sponge-spicules; Stacklawhill, thirty feet above the Linn-Spout Limestone; Glencart, Lambridden, Linn Spout, and Monkcastle, in the Upper-Limestone series; Birkhead, Thirdpart, Blackstones, Cunningham Baidland, Low Baidland, Law, and Auchens- keith, in the upper part of the Lower-Limestone series ; and Crawfield in the lower part of the same series. Other localities are Dockra, Hillhead, near Beith, and Dunlop, Ayrshire. They have also been met with in the limestones at Corrie- burn, Campsie Hills, near Kirkcaldy, Fifeshire, near Linlithgow, Charlestown Quarry near Inverkeithing, Roscobie Quarry, near Dunfermline, Macbiehil, Peebles, near Cupar, and near Dalkeith. The forms most widely distributed are the anchoring spicules of Hyalostelia and the cylindrical spicules of Reniera; in the Ayrshire district these are accompanied by the remarkably large spicules of Geodites, Asteractinella, Tholiasterella, and Acanthactinella. Though the beds of Sponge remains in Scotland are of much less thickness than those of Yorkshire and North Wales, yet, owing to the preservation of the spicules in loose materials, they have yielded a greater number of species. Trevanp.—A well-marked series of Sponge-beds, hardly inferior in importance to those of Yorkshire and North Wales, is developed in the so-called Upper Lime- stone of the Carboniferous series of the Irish Geological Survey. The Sponge- beds principally occur in the higher portions of the Upper Limestone, and they have been included with this as the equivalents of the Carboniferous or Mountain Lime- 1 “Geol. Mag., vol. ii, 1865, p. 200. 2 «Catalogue of the Western-Scottish Fossils,’ 1876, p. 36; also ‘ Proc. Nat. Hist, Soc. Glasgow,’ 1882, p. 234. O 102 BRITISH PALASOZOIC SPONGES. stone of England, whilst the overlying shales and sandstones between them and the Millstone-grit are regarded by Prof. Hull’ as corresponding to the Yoredale- beds. As, however, the Sponge-beds consist of chert, closely resembling that of the Yoredale series in England and North Wales, it is reasonable to conclude that they may occupy a corresponding horizon, even though no well-marked line of demarcation between them and the main mass of the Carboniferous Limestone has up to the present been noted. The Sponge-beds chiefly occur as nodular masses or bands of dark, mottled, compact chert, closely similar to those of Yorkshire and North Wales.*? Microscopic sections of specimens which I have lately collected from various outcrops of the rock in Queen’s County and Kilkenny to the south, and in Fermanagh and Sligo to the north-west of Ireland, all show the presence of spicules, and distinctly prove that the rock has been derived from them. Well-marked beds of chert, from one to three inches in thickness (‘025—-075 m.), are also frequently present in the dark limestones of the Calp or Middle series of the Carboniferous Limestone in the neighbourhood of Dublin, and these, like the higher beds, are filled with microscopic spicules. Owing to the irregular manner in which the nodular masses and bands of chert, constituting the Sponge-beds, are intercalated in the limestones of the Upper Series in Ireland, it is difficult to form an estimate of their total thickness. In Queen’s County and Kildare the chert layers are stated* by the late Professor Jukes and Mr. Kinahan to be sometimes so frequent that they make the rock nearly an entire mass of chert. In the ridge west of Carlow the greyish chert is stated to be over 30 or 40 feet in thickness. At Florence Court, near Enniskillen, Professor Hull’ estimates that the chert bands in the Upper Limestones have a total thickness of perhaps 150 feet (45 m.); but from my own observation this estimate seems considerably too high. 1 «Scientific Trans. Roy. Dublin Soc.,’ vol. i, N. S., 1878, p. 73. 2 In a recently published paper (‘ Proc. Royal Soe.,’ vol. xlii, 1887, pp. 304—308) Prof. Hull, F.R.S., the Director of the Irish Geological Survey, most emphatically combated a suggestion made by me two years since, that the chert bands of the Irish Carboniferous Limestone were probably derived from Sponge-spicules, the same as the chert beds of the Cretaceous strata of the south of England (‘ Phil. Trans.,’ 1885, pt. ii, p. 488). After the publication of this paper I went to Ireland and examined the chert beds in the various localities from whence Prof. Hull had obtained the specimens on which he based his conclusions, and I then found that there was decisive evidence that they were derived from Sponge remains as I had suggested (‘ Geol. Mag.,’ n. s., dec. iii, vol. iv, p. 44). An inspection of the microscopic sections which Prof. Hull described and figured showed, as Prof. Sollas had already stated (‘ Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ vol. vii, 1881, p. 141), that some of them were largely composed of spicules. 3 * Geol. Surv. Ireland, Explanation Sheet 128,’ p. 12, also quoted by Prof. Hull, op. cit., p. 75. 4 «Scientific Trans. Roy. Dublin Soc.,’ vol. i, N. S., 1878, p. 75. 5 «Proc. Royal Soe.,’ vol. xlii, p. 306, Note. GEOLOGICAL DISTRIBUTION. 103 The chert beds are well developed in the Upper-Limestone series of the County of Sligo ; more especially at the hill of Keishcorran near Ballymote, on the higher slopes of Knock-na-Rea, near the town of Sligo, and in the ridge of Ben Bulben to the north of Sligo Bay. The separate bands of chert vary from one to five inches in thickness, with intervening layers of blue limestone. The chert bands are frequent, and I should judge that in different places they form from one- tenth to one-fifth of the total mass of the rock. Beds of siliceous clay— probably resulting from decayed chert—and like the material in the Ayrshire deposits, filled with loose spicules, have been met with near the summit of Ben Bulben, and their contents described by Mr. H. J. Carter, F.R.S.* It is evident that to produce the enormous accumulation of spicules sufficient to build up beds of rock like those referred to in Yorkshire, North Wales, and Treland, reaching in one place a maximum thickness of 350 feet (105 m.),’ Sponge life must have been extremely abundant and persistent in the Carboniferous epoch, more so, perhaps, than at any subsequent period. It is true that the number of species yet recognised from these thick deposits of Sponge remains is comparatively limited, but it is hardly safe to conclude from this fact that there was but little variety of form in the group at this period, for, owing to the general and complete manner in which the Sponge-skeletons have been reduced into their component elements, and their unfavorable condition of preservation, all other generic and specific characters, beyond those of the form and proportions of the individual spicules, have been obliterated. The fact that not a single example of an entire Sponge has been up to the present discovered in any of the Sponge-beds of York- shire, North Wales, and Ireland is a striking proof of the complete manner in which their skeletons have been broken up. In this respect fossil Sponges have undergone the same reducing process as the Crinoids, of whose remains the massive beds of limestones in the Yoredale series mainly consist. Whilst in the limestones we rarely meet with more than the disarticulated joints and plates of the stems and calyces of Crinoids, in the chert and siliceous rocks intercalated with 1 ¢Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ ser. 5, vol. vi, 1880, p. 209. 2 Professor Sollas has lately stated that the extraordinary profusion of Sponge-spicules in modern marine deposits and in the ancient stratified rocks is due to the fact that the living Sponge is constantly producing and disengaging spicules, and that during the process of “ growth the spicule slowly passes from the interior to the exterior of the sponge, and is finally, in at least some Sponges ( Geodia, Stelletta), cast out as an effete product” (“ Sponges,” ‘ Encyclopxdia Britannica,’ ninth edition, vol. xxii, p. 420). Hitherto these deposits of Sponge remains have always been regarded as arising from the disintegration of their skeletons after the death of the Sponge, and this still seems to me the more probable explanation. Prof. Sollas’ statement is so marvellous that it will require strong confirmatory evidence before it can be accepted. At present none is given, and the general experience of other observers points in an opposite direction, viz. that in the growth of the Sponge the skeletal- spicules gradually tend to become firmer and more deeply embedded in the living tissues of the organism. 104 BRITISH PALAOZOIC SPONGES. the limestones only the microscopic detached skeletal-spicules of Sponges have been preserved. Permian System.—It is doubtful whether any genuine fossil Sponges have as yet been discovered in the strata of this system in the British area; those described as such by the late Prof. King’ prove, on examination, to be either organisms of very problematical character or inorganic concretions. The forms described as Sponges by Prof. Geinitz’? from the corresponding Dyas of Germany, are of an equally dubious character. 1 “Monog. of the Permian Fossils,’ Pal. Soc., 1849, pp. 11—14. 2 ¢ Die animalischen Ueberreste der Dyas,’ 1861, pp. 123-4, pl. xx. DESCRIPTION OF GENERA AND SPECIES. CAMBRIAN SPONGES. Sub-Order.—HBEXAcCtTINELLIDA. Family.—PRotosPoneip#. Genus.—Protosponaia, Salter. 1864. ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xx, p. 238. Generic Characters.—Sponges probably cup- or vase-shaped, with walls consist - ing apparently of a single layer of spicular mesh. This is composed of cruciform spicules of varying dimensions ; the larger are arranged so as to form a regular quadrate framework, which is divided into secondary squares by smaller spicules, and these are again subdivided in a similar manner, so that, when complete, there are four or five series of squares. The spicular rays appear to have been organically cemented together at their points of junction with each other, and there are traces of a delicate membrane in the interstitial areas between the rays, which may have united the entire meshwork together. No other structures beyond the wall of spicular framework have as yet been discovered, and it may be presumed that this constituted the entire skeleton of the Sponge. This genus is, apparently, most nearly related to Dictyophyton, Hall, in which the Sponge-wall is similarly constituted of larger and subordinate squares; but hitherto the spicular structure of these squares has not been described, and it is quite possible that it may not have been of cruciform spicules like those of Proto- spongia. From Phormosella, Hinde, the present genus is distinguished by the regular arrangement of the larger and smaller squares of the meshwork, and from Plectoderma, Hinde, by the simple, nonfasciculate disposition of the spicules. Mr. Salter defined the skeleton of this genus as “loosely reticular, formed of very large cruciform spicule, the branches of which cross each other at an angle of 80°, and only in one plane, no ascending or descending branches rising from the 106 BRITISH PALASOZOIC SPONGES. point of conjunction.” This view of the spicular character of the skeleton was much nearer the truth than that of Dr. Bowerbank, who stated that the structures were not spicules, but horny fibres replaced by pyrites.’ Different opinions are held as to whether the spicules in this genus were free, and merely held in position by the soft structures of the animal, or whether they were organically attached together by a deposition of silica at the junction of the rays with each other. So far as I have been able to judge from the few instances in which the spicular rays are seen in contact, they appear to have been cemented or fused together at their junction with each other, though there is not that complete coalescence of the adjacent rays which exists in regular Dictyonine hexactinellids. The spicular rays do not interlace with each other sufficiently to account for the preservation of connected portions of the meshwork in the fossil state, and without a certain degree of organic attachment they would, almost inevitably, have fallen entirely apart from each other. The fusion of the rays at their points of contact does not, however, appear to have been sufficiently strong to prevent that partial disruption of the spicular wall which has taken place in most of the examples, or the isolation of the larger spicules in many cases. 1. Prorosponcia renEesTRATA, Salter. Pi. I, figs. 1, 1 a. 1864. Provrosponeia FENESTRATA, Salter. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xx, p- 238, pl. xiii, figs. 12 a, db. 1873. — = = Cat. Cambrian and Sil. Foss. Cam- bridge, p. 3. 1877. — _— Zittel. Studien, Ab. 1, p. 45; Konigl. bayer. Akad. der Wiss., Cl. ii, Bd. xiii, Ab. 1; Neues Jahrbuch, p- 354. 1877. —" — Carter. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 4, VOlemx, Dp. LTT. 1880. — _ F. Roemer (in part). Lethea paleozoica, Th. 1, p. 316, fig. 59a. 1881. — — Etheridge, senr. Mem. Geol. Surv., vol. iii, 2nd ed., Appendix, p. 472. 1882. _ == Zittel. Neues Jahrb., Bd. ii, p. 203. 1883. — —- Hinde. Catalogue Foss. Sponges, p. 129, pl. xxvii, fig. 2. The fragments of the wall of this species which have been preserved are insufficient to indicate the probable form of the Sponge. The cruciform spicules 1 ¢ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xx, p. 239. e PROTOSPONGIA. 107 forming the skeletal mesh are of a delicate character, the rays are circular in section and nearly of an even thickness throughout their length. It is probable that the spicules were originally rectangular, but in the type specimen the rays are now oblique, owing to the distortion produced by the compression of the rock matrix. There are five different series of squares in the Sponge-wall, the rays bounding the largest squares are 8 mm. in length by ‘2 mm. in thickness, whilst the rays forming the secondary and smaller squares are 4 mm., 2, 1, and *5 mm. in length respectively. The junction of the rays with each other is, in no case, distinctly shown; they can be traced nearly to the point of contact, and do not apparently overlap the squares in which they are situated. The typical example of this species, now in the British Museum, exhibits a fragment of the Sponge-wall on the surface of a slab of hard black shale. The original silica of the spicules has been replaced by iron-pyrites, and a delicate film of this mineral extends over the surface of the Sponge, and is probably a replace- ment of a siliceous dermal membrane, which served in part to hold the spicular mesh together. Not only is the spicular framework distorted, but in all the specimens I have seen it is partially broken up and many of the spicules absent or displaced. This species differs from Protospongia Hicksi in the much more slender character of the spicular mesh, which is very clearly shown in the figures of the two species on Plate I. Distribution.—Cambrian : Menevian Group, St. David’s, South Wales; Lower Lingula Beds, Tyddyngwladis, Upper Mawddach, North Wales. 2. Protosponaia Hioxst, Hinde sp. nov. PI. I, figs. 2, 2 a. 1871. Protosponaia FENESTRATA, Hicks. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxvii, p. 401, pl. xvi, fig. 20. 1878. _ _ Brigger. Om paradoxidesskifrene ved Krek- ling, Nyt. Mag. f. Naturvidensk., vol. xxiv, p. 36, pl. vi, fig. 14. 1880. _ —_ F. Roemer (in part). Lethxa paleozoica, Th. 1, p. 316, fig. 59 6. 1880. — — Sollas. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxxvi, p. 362, fig. 1. 1884. — — Walcott. Pal. of the Eureka District, United States Geol. Surv., vol. viii, p. 10, pl. ix, figs. 5a, b. Sponge probably vasiform; the portions preserved indicate that the type specimen was at least 100 mm. in height by 75 mm. in width at thesummit. The 108 BRITISH PALAJOZOIC SPONGES. spicular mesh is composed of robust cruciform spicules, the rays are approximately rectangular, and nearly of a uniform thickness throughout their length. The centres of the spicules are slightly elevated, so that they are not strictly horizontal. The rays of the smaller spicules in the majority of cases dip beneath those of the larger forms. Five series of squares are present in the complete mesh, the largest are 8 mm. in diameter and the smallest -5 mm. ; the axes of the largest spicules are 16 mm. in length and ‘52 mm. in thickness, whilst the smallest are 1 mm. in length and °2 mm. in thickness. The typical example of this species, now in the Woodwardian Museum at Cambridge, is preserved on a block of black slate. The spicular mesh has been replaced by iron-pyrites; in places it stands boldly out from the rock surface. Though the regular arrangement of the spicules of the mesh is clearly shown in only one portion of the specimen, it can be traced over an extended surface, and it occurs at two different levels separated by an interval of matrix, of about 4 mm. in thickness. This appears to me to indicate that the entire Sponge was vasiform or cup-shaped, and that, owing to pressure, the opposite walls of the cup are now nearly in contact with each other. The original specimen was discovered by Dr. H. Hicks, F.R.S., who referred it to P. fenestrata, Salter. It was subsequently described in considerable detail by Prof. Sollas, who also regarded it as identical with Salter’s species. A comparison of this form with the type of P. fenestrata shows, however, a very considerable difference in the thickness of the spicular rays, sufficient to indicate it as a distinct species, which I have named in honour of its discoverer. In no case in this specimen are the points of contact of the spicules with each other clearly shown, but the structure of the mesh appears to me to justify the view that the spicules are cemented together where they join each other; Prof. Sollas states, however, that they are separated and not united either by envelop- ment in a common coating or by ankylosis. Fragments of mesh and detached cruciform spicules, apparently belonging to this species, have been discovered in Norway, Sweden, and also in Nevada, at approximately the same geological horizon. Dstribution.—Cambrian ; Menevian Group. Porth-y-Rhaw, near St. David’s, South Wales. Cambrian; Paradoxides-Shales, Krekling, Norway (Brégger) ; at Andrarum, Sweden, in beds with Paradowides and Agnostus pisiformis; Kureka district, Nevada, in the Prospect Mountain Group (Walcott). HYALOSTELIA. 109 Growp.—LyYssaKINA. Family.— PoutaKipe. Genus.—Hyatostauia, Zittel; Emend. Hinde. 1878. Handbuch der Paleontologie, Bd. i, Lief. 2, p. 185. Syn.—Pyritonema, M‘Coy ; Acestra, F. Roemer ; Acanthospongia, Young (non M‘Coy) ; Hyalonema, Young, Carter (in part) ; Serpula, Portlock, M‘Ooy (in part) ; Astroconia ? Sollas. Generic Characters.—Complete form of Sponge unknown ; the body-portion is composed partly of simple hexactinellid spicules in which one axis is usually much elongated, and partly of spicules in which one or more of the rays are inflated, spined, reduced to rounded knobs, or even absent. The dermal layer is mainly formed of large spicules in which the distal ray is reduced to a blunted process. The anchoring appendage consists of elongated, cylindrical, rod-like spicules, which are either separate, or in rope-like bundles, and sometimes terminate in four recurved rays. This genus was based by Prof. Zittel on the characters of Hyalonema Smithiu, as described by Messrs. Young and Young.’ These authors, however, included in the type-species a great variety of forms of detached spicules, some of which belong to distinct genera. Thus, for example, the spicules with from six to eight horizontal rays, mentioned in Zittel’s diagnosis of the genus, do not belong to the same Sponge as the simple hexactinellid spicules. This has been proved by the subsequent discovery of fragments of spicular mesh, in some of which hexactinellid spicules and their modifications are exclusively present, whilst others are composed only of the umbreila-shaped spicules with numerous horizontal rays.” I have therefore proposed that the skeletal-spicules in Hyalostelia Smithii, which has been taken as the type of the genus, should be restricted to such simple and modified hexactinellids as are present in the connected fragments of skeleton, and that the umbrella- and stellate-spicules should be excluded from it. The body- spicules do not appear to have been originally attached together in any way ; those occurring in the fragments of the skeleton which have been met with are held together by a secondary deposit of silica. The elongated anchoring spicules of the Sponge are present in great abundance in the same beds with the body-spicules, and are therefore assumed to have 1 «Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ ser. 4, vol. xx, p. 425, pls. xiv, xv. 2 ‘Cat. Foss. Sponges,’ p. 150. 110 BRITISH PALASOZOIC SPONGES. belonged to the same Sponge. In some instances, however, the spicular ropes and detached spicules occur in beds in which no hexactinellid spicules have as yet been met with; but this may in part be accounted for by the fact that even during the life of the Sponge the anchoring spicules would be buried in the bottom ooze, and would thus escape the disturbing influences which have probably scattered and destroyed the body-spicules after the death of the Sponge. These anchoring spicules, in the best preserved examples, exhibit all the characters of similar spicules in recent hexactinellid Sponges met with in deep-sea dredgings. They are composed of silica deposited in concentric layers, they are traversed by an axial canal, and many of them likewise terminate in four recurved hooks. Further, in one species the surface of many of these spicules is ornamented with slight projecting frills of a character similar to those present in the anchoring spicules of the recent Hyalonema mirabile, Gray. As the recent anchoring spicules are in all cases associated with a Sponge body consisting of hexactinellid spicules, it may be concluded that the fossil anchoring spicules were similarly associated, even though they now occur in beds in which the hexactinellid body-spicules are rare or apparently absent. Pyritonema, M‘Coy, and Acestra, F. Roemer, have been founded exclusively on the bundles of anchoring spicules. Onthe ground of priority, M‘Coy’s term might be claimed as the designation of this genus, but as objection could be taken to employing it for hexactinellid body-spicules as well as for the anchoring spicules, it seems preferable to adopt Zittel’s name Hyalostelia, which includes both kinds of spicules. Both M‘Coy and Portlock regarded the anchoring spicules occurring in the Carboniferous Limestone of Ireland as the tubes of annelids, and placed them in the genus Serpula. Hyalostelia is first known in Cambrian strata (Tremadoc Group), and it is also present in Ordovician, Silurian, and Lower-Carboniferous Rocks. Detached hexactinellid spicules in the Upper Chalk have been assigned to the genus, but the ropes or bands of anchoring spicules have not been met with above the Carboni- ferous Rocks. 3. Hyanostenia Frasciounus, M‘Coy sp. Plate I, figs. 3, 3 a, 3 0b. 1850. PyrironemMa rascicuLus, M‘Ooy. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. i, vol. vi, p. 273. 1854. — — Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 63. 1855. — — M‘Coy. Brit. Pal. Foss., p. 10, pl. 18, fig. 13. 1869. Eornyron expnanatum, Hicks. Geol. Mag., vol. vi, p. 534, pl. xx, figs. 1 a—e. HYALOSTELIA. Lit 1873. Pyrrronema rascrouvs, Salter. Cat. Cambrian and Silur. Foss. Cam- bridge, p. 30. 1881. Eopuyton ? expLanatum, Wathorst. Om spar af nagra evertebrade djur, &e., Kong. Svenska vetensk. Akad. Handl., Bd. 18, No. 7, p. 46. 1881. — — Hicks. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxxvii, p- 490. 1883. HyanosrELia FascicuLus, Hinde. Cat. Foss. Sponges, p. 151. 1886. — — — Geol. Mag., dec. iii, vol. iii, p. 387, fig. 1. No hexactinellid body-spicules are as yet known in connection with this species, which is founded exclusively upon fragments of the bundles of spicular rods forming the anchoring appendages of the Sponge. In some examples the bundles occur as narrow, nearly straight bands of indefinite length ; the longest specimen known is 140 mm. in length, from 5 to 6 mm. in width, and with a thickness varying from *5 to 2 mm.; in others they resemble stout ropes, from 20 to 25 mm. in thickness. The individual rods composing these bundles are, for the most part, in close contact and parallel with each other, and there-is no apparent twist in their course. Their axial canals are but rarely preserved, and the natural termination of the spicules is unknown. They are nearly circular in transverse section, and vary from ‘15 to ‘7 mm. in thickness. The surface of some of these spicular rods is quite smooth, whilst in others there is a minute projecting frill, disposed in an annular or spiral form, so that the spicule appears to be covered with transverse, slightly wrinkled strie. The spicular rods also occur detached and scattered through the rock, crossing each other in various directions. This species was founded by Prof. M‘Coy on a fragmentary band of spicules embedded in dark limestone of Llandeilo age. Special mention is made in the description of the irregular transverse plicz on the surface of the spicules, or tubes, as they are termed ; and this structure is clearly shown in the accompanying figure pl.is, fig. 13a. In the original specimen, however, now preserved in the Wood- wardian Museum, Cambridge, the “plice’”’ are very indistinct, and they can scarcely be distinguished from fractures in the spicules. In other specimens from Llandeilo rocks, the transverse frills are very prominent, and they form one of the distinguishing characters of the species. In some bundles, nearly all the spicules are frilled, but in others, only one in ten, or one in twenty are thus ornamented, whilst the others are quitesmooth. In the anchoring rope of the recent Hyalonema, Gray, some of the spicules are likewise furnished with spiral frills,’ bearmg minute spines, thus showing a general correspondence in structure to these Cambrian forms. Shght differences exist in the maximum thickness of the spicular rods in different bundles; for, whilst in some the largest spicules do not exceed °5 mm. in 1 Carter, ‘Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ ser. 4, vol. xii (1873), p. 372, pl. xiv. 112 BRITISH PALASOZOIC SPONGES. thickness, in others they reach to ‘*7 mm. In every instance smaller spicules are intermingled in the same bundles with the larger. In all the specimens examined the spicules are composed of chalcedonic silica. The larger bundles, which are not infrequent in the Llandeilo strata of Pont Ladies, are usually curved and folded over in various ways, which appear to result from the compressing and folding of the rocks in which they are enclosed. M‘Coy correctly compared this species with the anchoring rope of the recent Hyalonema, which at that time was regarded as a zoophyte, and it is placed in Morris’s catalogue with the Gorgonide. The specimen discovered by Dr. Hicks in the Tremadoc strata of St. David’s, was originally described by him as a vascular cryptogam under the name of Hophyton ? explanatum ; its true nature appears to have been first noticed by Dr. Nathorst, who pointed out its similarity to M‘Coy’s species. In the size of the spicules forming the bundles the present species corresponds very closely with Hyalostelia parallela, M‘Coy sp., from the Carboniferous strata of Ireland, but transverse striz are not developed in any of the spicules of this latter form. Distribution.—Cambrian : Tremadoe strata, St. David’s (Dr. Hicks). Ordo- vician: Llandeilo, Tre Gil, south of Llandeilo (M‘Coy) ; Meadowtown, Pont Ladies, Mincop, Shelve, Shropshire (Mr. G. H. Morton); near Builth ? (Wyatt-Edgell Coll. in Geol. Surv. Museum) ; Dobb’s Linn, Moffat (Prof. Dr. H. A. Nicholson). ORDOVICIAN SPONGES. Sub-Order.—LitHIstIDm&. Family.—ANOMOCLADINA. Genus.—ASTYLOSPONGIA, FH’. Roemer. 1860. Die silurische Fauna des westlichen Tennessee, p. 5. Syn.—Siphonia, in part Goldfuss ; Hisinger. Generic Characters.—Sponges sub-spherical or ovate in form, simple, free, with rounded bases, in which there is no indication of any surface of attachment. Two systems of canals are present, one extending from the outer surface towards the centre of the Sponge, and the other of large canals which have a generally vertical direction, following the outlines of the Sponge, and opening either into a shallow ASTYLOSPONGIA. 113 cloacal depression or freely at the summit. The spicular structure is a firm resistant mesh-work composed of spicules with solid rounded nodes or centres, from which from six to nine straight arms radiate in different directions. The spicular rays terminate in branched and slightly expanded processes, which are closely apposed to the nodes of adjoining spicules to form the skeletal meshwork ; in some cases, also, the rays meet where no centres exist, and their extremities partially interlock together and form a pseudo-node by their union. The Sponges of this genus were originally regarded as belonging to the genus Siphonia,' and as having been derived from Cretaceous strata. A similarity in their canal-structures to those of true Siphonie supported this belief, and their actual occurrence in the Drift deposits of Northern Germany mingled with Chalk Sponges was accepted as a confirmation of their coexistence in the Cretaceous strata. The subsequent discovery by F’. Roemer’ of the same forms in unquestionably Silurian strata in North America led to a recognition of their true position. They were then placed, both by Zittel* and by Roemer, with the Hexactinellide,* from the supposed six-rayed character of the spicules; but after that Dr. R. Martin® had pointed out the variable number of the rays in the spicules, Zittel’ removed the genus to the Anomocladina family of the Lithistide, to which it is naturally allied both in general form, in its canal-systems and its spicular structure. Zittel, however, now regards the elementary spicules of the genus as simple rods with branching extremities, which by their union together form the nodes. There is some difficulty in determining the character of the elementary spicules, since in no instance at present have they been found detached, whilst in the connected skeletal mesh the union is so intimate that their elementary characters are concealed. In the recent’ Vetulina stalactites, Os. Schmidt, which has been placed by Zittel in the same family as Astylospongia, the elementary spicules clearly consist of rays projecting from central nodes, and there is reason to conclude that the spicular elements of Astylospongia were similarly constituted. The species of this genus are limited to Ordovician and Silurian strata, principally the latter. They are comparatively abundant in North America and in the Silurian districts of the Baltic, but with the single exception of the form mentioned below from Caradoc strata, the genus is not otherwise represented in this country. 1 ¢ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. i, p. 17. 2 «Die silurische Fauna d. westl. Tenn.,’ p. 5. 3 ‘Studien I,’ p. 44. 4 ‘ Lethea pal.,’ p. 307. 5 “Untersuchung iiber die Organisation von Astylospongia,” ‘Archiv des Ver. d. Freunde d. Naturgesch. in Mecklenburg,’ Jahrg., xxxi, 1877. 6 “ Ueber Astylospongide und Anomocladina,”’ ‘ Neues Jahrb.,’ 1884, Bd. ii, p. 75. 7 See Sollas, ‘‘ On Vetulina stalactites” (O. 8.), ‘ Proc. Roy. Irish Acad.,’ 2 ser., vol. iv, p. 486. 114 BRITISH PALAOZOIC SPONGES. 4, ASTYLOSPONGIA INCISO-LoBATA, /’. Roemer. Plate II, figs. 5, 5 a. 1860. AsTYLOSPONGIA INOISO-LOBATA, F. Roemer. Die silur. Fauna d. west. Tenn., p. 11, pl. i, figs. 3, 3a. 1848. Sponera — — Leonh. u. Bronn’s Jahrb., p. 685. 1861. AsTYLOSPONGIA — — Die fossile Fauna von Sade- witz, p. 13, pl. ii, fig. 4. 1864. — — Salter. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xx, p. 239, Note. 1873. — GRATA, — MS. Cat. Cambrian and Silur. Foss. Cambridge, p. 31. 1880. — INCISO-LOBATA, F. Roemer. Lethea pal., p. 310. Sponges depressed spherical in form, with shallow furrows extending down the sides so as to form imperfect lobes. The canals open freely at the summit of the Sponge. The only British example of this species, now preserved in the Museum of the Geological Survey, Jermyn Street, is 16 mm. in height by 36 mm. in transverse diameter. The summit is slightly convex, and the canal-apertures, about 1 mm. in width, are irregularly disposed over it. Six shallow furrows, indicating as many lobes,extend from near the summit to the base, The interior of the specimen is now a solid mass of iron-pyrites, in which only traces of canals can be distinguished, and, as the spicular structure is altogether obliterated, its true character is not altogether free from doubt. The specimen was originally referred to e Name of Genus and Species. Reference to Page and Plate. | -2 | ‘2 | § 3 a8 2S te (Sele [eg a/Bla]s| 3] 5 Sy VS (Ne) IS [ier MonacrTInELLIDaz. PAGE Atractosella siluriensis, Hinde... ..................| 123, Pl. I, figs. 6, a—d ......)... san eX Reniera Carteri; Hinde .........ccccecesessscecceeess 142, Pl. LV, figsic05:0-—f. «.cec| ce collpesdlieee x =e ACIT UIA METENOEs <2 sncantcheaeecee ome eset PA PRS EV. thers Aes Scotde ca saltas allveoana cell tee x ie ET CIUV ALA LE UIIUG: week de Aran ae inecee eeaee TAS RI EX Gass 5, (a,iB ane es. ees eealleee x Sw NIP Ay ELC RA Cc crscrs alec weacciaenadoa gaara aes 143; Pl. UX, fies: 6, @.:0.5.c2| peels taratos x Se PTACMIN LENE Em. «2 sds crane ont eaeae snaemeaaere 144) PTX AGG 1d, Occ elre sis Iter alieoeal om re APLC LO CLOy wencetah imecoae ee ee 144, Pl. LX, figs: Sao... hoes aewle eee x ==) _ jyrellilirany SEGA eo Ssncnancoondscaakbonacne 144) Pl EX fey Die oe. .teeetesed ectalles lice alta x Atxinella vetustay il e7de. 5. scccsmeencceeecteee cose ane WAG PV TY BOG Voce oneness eealteee x Set, Spaxills, A 0nde,.. cise. css sneresuee ss sacer LA EL TEN fie UO Gree naeteinees [ace ed een eee x Haplistion Armstrongi, Young ...............00000 DAT PhS Vi, asl Gah Heel eal eg ine |e x — vermiculatum, Oarter sp..............5. 148) PU We MgB 25: os 008s faa aol ee alien x TETRACTINELLID®. Geodites antiquus,. 27206) .o.ic:.danoevecsctes vavess 150, Pl. V, figs. 3, a—d ......]... eleselll revere [eter x = deformis; lande: %.,n. cd nosce eves 150, Pl. V, figs. 4, a=¢ ..1.3:|%:. Eiken ieee x ty RARtAtUS Ronde. ssn cee tee< dcacaeeecee 151; Rie LX iies: Va; lier beciieeaueee x — Oia, JEG soopsosedgosodoonnacosenous 151, Pl. IX, figs. 12,a—e ...|... opelfiseealeeet es as PS SIFA DIOR, ELEN Ge s.25.\sasnercetaces meer et DOZ SARL ARV ec cecen cece (hee Seoul x Pachastrella vetusta, Hinde .........secccssecvocees 153, Pls V5 figs15;;G—¢ aaa so6|| ooD|} o00 x — humilis, ende. -scemectoascenssoscees QS ed BN ea 107 peeesiee ae ee bee 52a heeeal tae x LitHIstTiIpm. Astylospongia inciso-lobata, F. Roemer ......... TU), Deal, Wane G5 soocae boc acai Hindia fibrosa, F. Roemer sp...........cc0ececveeees TVG) PLS TX, Higa —e | oss \inan ex cat ay LUC cai | Cena 2 L177; (aman ie ieke Seeman Caer ee LS Tee E IV; Hess Oy oft apece cos [eee | sae] wee x Cnemidiastrum priscum, Hinde...............00.... 156, PL V, figs. 6,6—7) .....-. ue loos alliea sale ceaeS Doryderma Dalryense, Hinde ..........6..00.0005. ISGP IV, fies, 774—€ | asses bred|toaat leawe eer x HEXACTINELLIDS. Protospongia fenestrata, Salter ............00cec0005 LOG. Pi Efe sy Us ale auecscece x = Hicksi, Hinde Se!" [efetelelaialaleia\sieiets/ele} diele/alets 107, lade iG figs. 2, 2, Dine .cnsce| X% Hyalostelia fasciculus, M:Coy sp. ............00006 TO) By fips G5:0 oe ee x | Xx = gracilis; inde tectcn. 29 ceascaradiesees 129, Pl. I, figs. 5, a—e. ...... Pha Beall < — Smithii, Young § Young sp. ......... 118,158; Play fics: 4ya3) Bi: VI, figs. 1, a—l, 2, a—k}...| X | ...]... x 186 BRITISH PALAOZOIC SPONGES. : Z a al . | aaiRoeiee Name of Genus and Species. Reference to Page and Plate. 2/8 |8|8/ Ei ie) x || Ws =I o|'s B iesilies | eal emime S/6/4/Ald |e HEXACTINELLID® (continued). PAGE Hyalostelia parallela, W‘Coy sp..............00.c000- LUST Ves Nl beg ets 50 ctane| | aba |) ceo |f 30 x Plectoderma scitulum, Hinde........................ 1247 PU tog. lea, iOse-oe|- <6 (een Dacmmoasel, Ova, JEG ..4cancancasooceoesconanaee IPSS IAM ewireeh ay bil ogecel|isea lear x Dictyophyton Danbyi, M‘Coy sp. ...............00. 128, Pl. II, figs. 4, a—e ......| ... AlN Holasterella conferta, Carter .............00.00c0000. 164) PI WIS figs: 25a ¢ cl s-\(.-5)|)-251\eenl lax Spiractinella Wrightil, Hinde .............00.:..05 1GS rl VW Mies Al ai oeles allie | eee Acanthactinella Benniei, Hinde.....................| 167, Pl. VIII, figs. 4, a—z...) ...|...]...]...] Amphispongia oblonga, Salter Bose deepocna|| lathes Levy WOO ots 3h Segee | 208 |hcoe x Tischadites: Kesnigu, Murch) ..c.5 s.sec-cness-csceeelt 20, ele ML tos. lo ia,vO" Beer ae x |X — imdstrosmieende: eke eee LAS Fi] ed ul Ee Oe sae cry | aes x Spherospongia tessellata, Phillips.................. 136) BSLV se fies. 2) G——c ors. ellen eon eX Receptaculites Neptuni, Defrance.................. 189, Pl. II, fig.3; Pl. IV, fig.1)...|... x | x OcTACTINELLID&. Astrwospongia patina, #. Roemer ..................| 184, Pl. I, figs. 7, a—d ......|...]... x — Devoniensis, Hinde ............... 140; Bl EV igs. 8;:@—e-"ers| eles < HEtERACTINELLIDA. Tholiasterella Youngi, Hinde.............0.....0000. POOP LS WL tes 2 af eles ee eee eee x — CRONE, JELMHA.. codnosaascornvessac%e: E70; PY Wil figs a—glie ea lieealince x —— COVIMOACNEY, JFOMOTE coo ncosaneoncesaunage Wi. (Pls Villy figs 38sec x — CRASSA ELON Cmate eee eee ee iil, Wl, WANUE, fives, i, ag lel, IDG eS BE, Gy Oe anccocee|| coo || noe Bee nes | 5:6 Asteractinella expansa, Hinde ...................0 173, Pl VANS figs. 3; a— 2 eel Salles ss) eee _ Gumida, inde. 5.2 duet se con enon |) Le ay el Mee BBs Lag seen onal ser eat et CaLCISPONGIA. Peronella sparsa, Hinde .... L2G; PIO UEXS fos: 4o9a—e 22s eae eee eens Cee ree tee ret wee ree eee ees TABLE OF DOUBTFUL SPECIES, 187 Taste I[.—List of Bad and Doubtful Species in Alphabetical Order. | Z i=] «}o8 sella i ae eel alle heel ceil Sl 2 toe lee le |e S| SO a eb leseiwe PAGE Acanthospongia siluriensis, Salter............-.0...:.ceeeeee eee Li pela. Astylospongia grata, Salter, MIS. (sc.iscccsscee cousecesssesce 177 x Bothroconis plana, King ................-+- eee Sma neinstese? 178 ap x C@nemidium: tenue, Lonsdale 2.-5es.0:.20.seeseneesecensoeseree 178 x Coscinopora placenta, Lonsdale .............ccsccsesseeeee see os 178 x Mntobia (Cliona) antiqua, Portlock ..... 12.2: 2..-000c000s 00 178 x Favospongia Ruthveni, Salter, MS. ...............c.ceeeeee ee 179 aan ess isehadites mucropora, Salier .. .cccwccsccsesneeceseceacense ener: 179 x Mammillopora mammillaris, King...................sceeneeeee 179 eee || Paleacis cuneata, Meek and Worthen sp. ...........002--0000- 180 oe x Peotospongia dittusa, Salter: 2 .......cnsp.cccasseesoneseetao-ane>: 180 x = Pin abellaw ices. Sa meene asec reyenaceee eee 180 x -- Pichi] OW a ER COMER «snares «donc aenee ance tans ee 180 x — Inidensis,! FOUTS. gemes ne Joes descotisksaetee tare 180 x — MACULBLOTIMIS, VEVOL sc otclsccc. we ke — sf my PATH LX, Figs. 1, 1 a—1 g —AsrrracTINELLA TUMIDA, Hinde, sp. nov. Figs. 1, 1 a—1 f—Various forms of skeletal-spicules. Enlarged ten diameters. Fig. 1 g.—A fragment of the skeleton of the Sponge, showing the irregular arrangement of the large and smaller spicules. Enlarged twenty diameters. From the Lower Carboniferous, upper part of the Lower Limestone series at Law Quarry, Dalry, Ayrshire. The original specimens in the collections of Mr. J. Smith and Mr. Bennie. Figs. 2 2 a, 2 6.—THoniastERELLA crassa, Hinde, sp. nov. Figs. 2, 2 a—Fragments of the skeleton of the Sponge, showing the arrangement of the spicules and the partial welding of the rays of adjacent forms. Enlarged ten diameters. Fig. 2 6.—An “umbrella”’-shaped spicule in which the rays are very inequally developed. The vertical ray has been broken off. Enlarged ten diameters. From the Lower Carboniferous, lower part of Lower Limestone series at Crawfield Quarry, Beith, Ayrshire. The original specimens in the collection of Mr. John Young, F.G.S. Figs. 3, 3 a—3 e.—Hinpta FIBROSA, Roemer sp. Fig. 3.—Portion of a longitudinal section, showing the spicular mesh, which has been replaced by calcite. Enlarged sixty diameters. Fig. 3 a.—Portion of a transverse section of the same specimen, showing the canals bounded by the spicular mesh. From limestones of Ordovician Age at Craighead, Girvan, Ayrshire. Fig. 3 b.—Portion of a longitudinal section, showing the spicular mesh. The structure has been replaced by calcite, and the junction of the spicules with each other is only faintly shown. Enlarged one hundred diameters. From Silurian strata at Dalhousie, New Brunswick. Figs. 8 c, 3 d, 3 e.—Three detached spicules of the Sponge. Enlarged eighty diameters. The spicules retain their siliceous structure ; they are, however, much eroded by fossilization. From a specimen from Dalhousie. The original examples are in my collection. Figs. 4, 4 a—4 e.—PERONELLA sPaRsa, Hinde, sp. nov. Figs. 4, 4 a—4 c.—Detached three-rayed spicules referred to this species. Enlarged sixty diameters. Figs. 4 d—4 e.—Smaller four-rayed spicules. Enlarged sixty diameters. From Lower Carbo- niferous at Woodend, Cowdens, Fife, Scotland. Collection of Mr. J. Bennie. Figs. 5,5 a, 5 6.—Rentera cravara, Hinde, sp. nov. Detached skeletal-spicules. Enlarged sixty diameters. From the Chert Sponge-beds of the Yoredale series at Richmond, Yorkshire, and Henblas, Flintshire. My collection. Figs. 6, 6 a, 6 6.—Rentera virea, Hinde, sp. nov. Detached skeletal-spicules. Enlarged sixty diameters. From the Carboniferous Limestone at Clitheroe, Lancashire, and from the Yoredale Sponge-beds at Richmond, Yorkshire. Figs. 7, 7 a—7 6.—Rentera GRACILIS, Hinde. Detached skeletal-spicules. Enlarged sixty diameters. From the Sponge-beds of the Yoredale series at Richmond, Yorkshire. My collection. Figs. 8, 8 a—8 c.—Reniera Zire, Poéta. Detached skeletal-spicules. Enlarged sixty diameters. From the Sponge-beds of the Yoredale series at Halkin and Henblas, Flintshire. My collection. Fig. 9.—RENrIERA BActLLUM, Hinde, sp. nov. Detached skeletal-spicules. Enlarged sixty diameters. From the Sponge-beds of the Yoredale series at Trelogan, Flintshire. Fig. 10.—AxXINELLA PaxILLus, Hinde, sp. nov. A detached skeletal-spicule. Enlarged forty diameters. From the Carboniferous Limestone at Clitheroe, Lancashire. Figs. 11, 11 a, 11 6.—Groprres nastatus, Hinde, sp. nov. Fig. 11.—A trifid zone-spicule. Enlarged forty diameters. Figs. 11 a, 11 6.—Two detached acerate spicules, similarly enlarged. From the Carboniferous Limestone at Clitheroe, Lancashire. My collection. Figs. 12, 12 a—12 e.—Gropires cornutus, Hinde, sp. nov. Fig. 12.—A trifid zone-spicule. Enlarged forty diameters. Fig. 12 a.—A trifid so-called anchor-spicule, similarly enlarged. Figs. 12 6, 12 c.—Two acerate skeletal-spicules, similarly enlarged. Figs. 12 d, 12 e.—Two reniform spicules of the dermal layer of the Sponge. Enlarged sixty diameters. From the Chert Sponge-beds of the Yoredale series at Richmond, Yorkshire, and Henblas and Trelogan, Flintshire. My collection. Figs. 13, 18 a.—Flesh Spicules of Hexacrinettip Sponees. Fig. 13.—A detached flesh-spicule with spinous rays. Enlarged two hundred diameters. From the Chert Sponge-beds of the Yoredale series at Richmond, Yorkshire. Fig. 18 a.—An imperfect flesh-spicule. Enlarged one hundred diameters. From a boulder of Carboniferous Chert in the Drift at York. My collection. PAST, Ey xe 2 SAI EPO ARI a (rw a x PARE, Setar, g = visdeets a siti Scene le) b i H } ——— Sf a Ce a) - OLN OLLI en, sy S Raccemmeesstlioantiita 3 ad 3g me * SOT z ec we, mye Cehaaiien } Cees cemereny peers i} > S < STENTS, West, Newman & Co.imp. A.T. Hollick del. et lith PALAONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. INSTITUTED MDCCCXLVII. VOLUME FOR 1887. LONDON: MDOCCLXXXVIII. A MONOGRAPH BRITISH PALAOZOIC PHYLLOPODA (PHYLLOCARIDA, Pacxarp). BY PROF. T. RUPERT JONES, F.RB.S., F.G.S., &c., AND DR. HENRY WOODWARD, F.R.S., F.G.8., &c. PART f. CHRATIOCA RI DAL, Paces 1—72. Puates I—XII. LONDON: PRINTED FOR THE PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 1888. - PRINTED BY ADLAEBD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. A MONOGRAPH ON THE BRITISH PALHOZOIC PHYLLOPODA. (PHYLLOCARIDA, Packard.) INTRODUCTION. Fossin remains referable only to organisms related to such Phyllopodous animals as Nebalia, Apus, and Hstheria have been met with in many of the Geological Formations. Dr. Scouler, in 1835, was the first to treat of one of these fossils, namely, Argas (afterwards Dithyrocaris), having some alliance to Apus. Professor M‘Coy, in 1848, and Mr. J. W. Salter, in 1853, described remains of some more or less Nebalia-like genera (Ceratiocaris and Hymenocaris). Subsequently numerous other forms, variously related to the two above-mentioned Crustaceans, have been described and figured by paleontologists at home and abroad. The history of the fossil Hstheri@ has already been given in a Monograph published by the Palzonto- graphical Society in 1862. A general view of the generic characters and geological distribution of these fossil Phyllopoda is offered in the annexed Table. We may mention that Dr. A.S. Packard, junr., in 1879 and 1883, leaving Hstheria among the true Phyllopoda (Branchiopoda), has referred all the other fossil forms in the accompanying list, with which he was acquainted, together with Nebalia, to a separate group, the Phyllocarida which we now propose to adopt. 2 BRITISH PALASOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. TABLE OF THE KNOWN GENERA OF FOSSIL PHYLLOCARIDA. I.—_CARAPACE, UNIVALVE. I. FLat oR SLIGHTLY CONVEX SHIELD. 1. Neither sutured nor ridged along the back. Notched in front. A. Posterior border entire. Middle and Up- ony : per Silurian.! } 1. Discinocaris, H. Woodward. a Round shield; angularnotch. (These are Triassic. 2. Aspidocaris, Reuss. 1867. possibly the same.) Devonian. 3. P Spathiocaris, Clarke. 1882. Angular notch.- These shields differ in shape. — 4. ? Pholadocaris, H. W. 1882. Sinuous notch. Some of them are pro- — 5. ? Lisgocaris, Clarke. 1882. Oblong notch. bably the Aptychi of Gonia- — 6. ? Ellipsocaris, H.W. 1882. Rounded notch. tites. B. Posterior border slightly notched. _ 1. ? Cardiocaris, H.W. 1882. Front notch oblong. c. Posterior border deeply notched. Lower Silurian.! 1. ? Pterocaris, Barrande. 1882. Both notches angular. Test radiately marked. Lower Silurian i 2. Dipterocarts, Clarke. 1883. Both notches angular. Test ridged along the and Devonian. middle. Lower Silurian. 3. ? Orescentilla, Barrande. 1872. Both notches angular. Possibly a sutured form. 2. Ridged along the back. (Like Apus.) Devonian and } 1. Dithyrocaris, Scouler. 1843. Ridged and sometimes prickly. These are Carboniferous. (Argas, Scouler. 1835.) possibly the Carboniferous. 2. Rachura, Scudder. 1878. (Only telson known.) same. 3. Sutured along the back. Notched in front. Middle and ue} per Silurian. Lower Silurian. 2. Peltocaris, Salter. 1863. Rounded notch. _ 3. Pinnocaris, R. E. Jun. 1878. Slight notch. Strie# concentric far back. 1. Aptychopsis, Barrande (and H. W.). 1872. Angular notch. Il. FoLpEp SHIELD, BENT ALONG THE BAOK (LIKE N#BALIA), 80 AS TO FORM AN OVER- ARCHING CARAPACE, OR A PAIR OF ATTACHED VALVES. Lingula-flags. 1, Hymenocaris, Salter. 1853. Smooth. Lower Silurian. 2. ?‘ Cytheropsis testis, Barrande. 1872. Not well known. Uppermost Devo- nian or Lowest 3. Protocaris, Baily. 1872. Not well known. Carboniferous. 1 In the old or Murchisonian sense. FOSSIL PHYLLOCARIDA. 3 II,—-CARAPACE, BIVALVE. I. Pop-.iKs. Arenig and ark gula-flags. Tremadoc, ere} 2. . Oaryocaris, Salter. 1862. Pod-like; elongate, narrow, smooth. rian, and Devo- > 2. Ceratiocaris, M‘Coy. 1849. Pod-like; subovate, suboblong, &c.; striate. nian(America). Upper Silurian. 3. Physocaris, Salter. 1860. Round. Lower Silurian. 4, Nothozoe, Barrande. 1872. Oval. Carboniferous. 5. Oryptozoe, Packard. 1886. Suboblong. Upper Silurian. 6 7 Carboniferous. . Xiphocaris, T, R. J. and H. W. 1886. (Only telson known.) . Oolpocaris, Meek. 1872. Subovate; strongly emarginate at one end (posterior). II. Pop-tike: Oounatsz.? Upper Silurian. 1. Hmmelezoe, T. R. J. and H. W. 1886. Subovate. III. Wira Swe.uines (DUE TO INTERNAL ORGANS) IN THE ANTERO-DORSAL REGION, ONE OF WHICH, ON EACH VALVE, MAY BE OCULAR.} Devonian. . Echinocaris, Whitfield. 1880. Leperditioid. Segments spinose. Upper Silurian. . Aristozoe, Barrande. 1872. Leperditioid. — Orozoe, Barrande. 1872. Leperditioid. Devonian. . Elymocaris, Beecher. 1884. Leperditioid. . Tropocaris, Beecher. 1884. Leperditioid. Wrinkled. . Ptychocaris, Novak. 1885. Leperditioid. Wrinkled. . ? Phasganocaris, Novak. 1886. (Only telson known.) Upper Silurian. IAA wd IV. Wira SweLines IN THE ANTERO-VENTRAL REGION; OCULAR TUBEROLE NOT APPARENT. Upper Silurian. 1. Callizoe, Barrande. 1872. Leperditioid. V. CoNCHIFEROIDAL; PROBABLY ENCLOSING ALL THE ABDOMINAL SEGMENTS. Tremadoc. 1. Lingulocaris, Salter. 1886. Modioloid, and faintly ridged. Carboniferous. 2. Solenocaris, Meek. 1872. Pod-shaped, and concentrically marked. Silurian. 3. ? Orthonotella, Ulrich. 1882. Oblong. en eer 4. Myocaris, Salter. 1864. Quadrangular, and ridged obliquely. nian ! Carboniferous. 5. Leaia, Jones. 1862. Quadrangular, ridged obliquely, and concentrically marked. Devonian. Carboniferous. Triassic. Rhetic. 6. Estheria, Riippel. 1838. (True Phyllopod.) Like a bivalved Jurassic. Neocomian. molluse, and concentrically marked. Tertiary? Recent. 1 Tf the “‘ ocular’’ swellings of the carapace be eye-spots, such a character would necessitate the removal of these forms to a separate division. But the nature of these prominences is uncertain. 4 BRITISH PALAOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. The Phyllocarida.—We have long held the opinion that the expanded disc-like shields, suchas Peltocaris, Discinocaris, Aptychopsis, and some others, were probably related ancestrally to the larval or adult forms of Phyllopods like Apus, Lepidurus, &¢c., whilst the relationship between the living Nebalia and the numerous genera of Palzsozoic Pod-shrimps does not necessarily preclude us from considering these forms as still belonging to the Enromosrraoa, although placed in Packard’s order PHYLLOOARIDA. As to ornamentation, the concentric striz, marking lines of growth, appear to correspond most closely in character and origin with the similar decoration observable on the valves of Hstheria, Limnadia, &c., so that their absence upon the carapaces of Apus and Nebalia does not necessarily prove that shields so ornamented cannot be deemed to belong to Crustacea or even to the Puyiiopopa ; whilst many of the carapaces of the fossil genera, e.g. Dithyrocaris, Ceratiocaris, &c., have either concentric or anastomosing strie covering the entire surface of their cara- paces; and these forms are related to Nebalia, which has a smooth carapace destitute of ornamentation. Claus and Gerstaeker are of opinion that Nebalia is not a Phyllopod. Because Nebalia during its embryonal life (whilst still in the egg) passes through the ‘*‘ Nauplius” and “ Zoéa stages,’ which in Decapods occur partly in the free state, it has been regarded by some as a “‘ Phyllopodiform Decapod.” The potentiality of a form to attain to a higher existence seems to be here mistaken for actuality. Since it never attains a higher development, as an adult, than that of a Phyllopod, and has no retrograde metamorphosis, may we not with as equal reason regard Nebalia as a highly-organised Phyllopod, as to assert that it is a Decapod arrested at the Phyllopod stage P All who have studied the Puyiiopopa have been struck by the peculiar points of special interest to be observed in Nebalia.’ Milne Edwards, in his ‘ Histoire Naturelle des Crustacés ’ (1840), places Nebalia in the family Apuside among the Phyllopods; at the same time he remarks, ‘‘ The Nebalie are very singular little crustaceans, which, by reason of their stalked eyes” and their carapace, approach the PoporutHatmia; they do not, however, possess branchiz, properly so called, but they respire by the aid of their thoracic feet, which are developed into membranaceous and foliaceous appendages. They resemble in many respects, and establish a passage between Mysis and Apus.” 1 For a very full account of Webalia, see the ‘Twelfth Annual Report of the United States Geological Survey, Part I, “ Geology, Paleontology, and Zoology,” 8vo, 1883 (Washington), “ A Monograph of the Phyllopod Crustacea of North America, with remarks on the Order Phyllocarida,” by A. 8S. Packard, jun., pp. 295—592, and plates i—xxxix. Also the ‘ American Naturalist’ for Oct., Nov., and Dec., 1882, vol. xvi, pp. 785, 861,945 ; and G. O. Sars, ‘ Challenger Reports,’ 1885 and 1887. * Pedunculated eyes are also present in Branchipus and Artemia, so that the stalked eyes of Nebalia can scarcely be regarded as an essentially distinctive character. THE PHYLLOCARIDA. 5 Baird (1850) founded the family Nebaliade, and regarded Nebalia as a Phyllopod. Prof. J. D. Dana (1853), in his great work on the Crustacea, retained the family name (Nebaliade), and he placed the family in the Puytopopa. Metschnikoff in 1865 published an abstract of his account of the development of Nebalia Geoffroyi, and in 1868 the full essay in the Russian language. Fritz Miller, in his ‘ Fir Darwin,’ states that Metschnikoff has observed ‘“ that Nebalia, during its embryonal life, passes through the ‘ Nauplius and Zoéa stages,’ which in the Decapoda occur partly (in Peneus) in the free state.’ ‘‘ Therefore,” he adds, ‘‘I regard Nebalia as a Phyllopodiform Decapod.” In 1872 Claus gave an account, with excellent figures, of the external anatomy of Nebalia Geoffroyt, and in 1876 he described the internal anatomy. In 1875 in the account of the Atlantic Crustacea of the “ Challenger Expedition,” Willemoes-Suhm placed the Nebaliade among the Schizopoda. In 1879 Dr. A. 8. Packard, jun., in the ‘ American Naturalist,’ vol. xiii., p. 128, proposed that Nebalia and its fossil allies should be placed in a new order, which he proposed to name the Puytiocaripa. Dr. Packard writes: “The Nebaliade, represented by the existing genus Nebalia, have generally been considered to form a family of Phyllopod Crustacea. Metschnikoff, who studied the embryology of Nebalia, considered it to be a ‘ Phyllopodiform Decapod.’ Beside the resemblance to the Decapods, there is also a combination of Copepod and Phyllopod characteristics. The type is an instance of a generalised one, and is of high antiquity, having been ushered in during the earliest Silurian Period, when there were (when we regard the relative size of most Crustacea, and especially of living Nebalie) gigantic forms. Such was Dithyrocaris, which must have been over a foot long, the carapace being seven inches long. The modern Nebalia is small, about half an inch in length, with the body compressed, the carapace bivalved as in Limnadia, one of the genuine Phyllopods. There is a large rostrum over- hanging the head; stalked eyes; and, besides two pairs of antenne and mouth- parts, eight pairs of leaf-like, short, respiratory feet, which are succeeded by swimmine-feet. There is no metamorphosis, development being direct. “Of the fossil forms, Hymenocaris was regarded by Salter as ‘the more generalised type.’ The genera Peltocaris and Discinocaris characterise the Lower Silurian Period, Ceratiocaris the Upper, Dictyocaris' the Upper Silurian and the lowest Devonian strata, Dithyrocaris and Argas® the Carboniferous Period. Our existing north-eastern species is Nebalia bipes (Fabricius), which occurs from Maine to Greenland. “The Nebaliads were the forerunners of the Drcapopa, and form, we believe, the type of a distinct order of Crustacea, for which the name PAYLLOCARIDA is pro- posed.” 1 Of doubtful alliance. * Not separate from Dithyrocaris. 6 BRITISH PALAOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. The order Paytnocaripa has been thus defined : Pxytocaripa, Packard (1879). Body long, with five cephalic, eight thoracic, and eight abdominal segments, with a thin or chitinous skin ; generally covered with a bivalved shell having a movable rostrum. Hyes pedunculated and faceted. Upon the under side of the head are two pairs of antenne, the mandibles, and two pairs of maxille furnished with palpi. The body-segments are compressed, they support eight pairs of large Phyllopodiform thoracic feet. The abdomen is composed of eight large segments’ provided with six pairs of simple swimming-feet fringed with sete, of which the four anterior pairs are the largest, and the two posterior pairs very small. The abdomen terminates in setaceous filaments, or in a telson divided into three or more parts. (Zittel, ‘Handbuch der Palaeontologie,’ Munich, 1885.) In 1880 Professor Claus, ‘ Lehrbuch der Zoologie,’ writes, ‘‘ This remarkable form (Nebalia) was for a long time regarded as a Phyllopod, and in many of its characters it represents a connecting link between the Puytiopopa and the Matacosrraca. The structure and segmentation of the head and thorax resemble that of the Malacostraca, but the terminal region of the abdomen does not present the special form of a caudal plate or telson. In Nebalia we probably have to do with an offshoot of the Phyllopod-like ancestors of the Matacosrraca, which has persisted to the present time.” He adds, ‘“‘ Nebalia is best placed in a special group Leprostraca, between the Enromostraca and Manacostraca. The Paleozoic genera Hymenocaris, Peltocaris, &c. would have to be placed in such a group.’ ‘It is,’ writes Professor Claus, ‘‘ in the highest degree probable that all these [ Palzeozoic Puyiiocaripa] are not true Phyllopods, but have belonged to a type of Crustacea, of which there are no living representatives, but which, taking their origin from forms allied to the lower types of Hntomostraca, have prepared the way for the Malacostracan type. Such a connecting link, which has survived to the present day, we evidently find in the genus Nebalia.”* Tn his ‘ Handbuch der Palaeontologie,’ Munich, 1885, Professor Dr. K. A. Zittel adopts Packard’s order Puyiiocaripa, but places it under the Matacosrraca, and between the EpriopHtHatmia and the Mrrosromara. In his article on the Paleozoic allies of Nebalia, Dr. A. 8. Packard, jun., thus sums up the Puyuiocaripa: “ From our total lack of any knowledge of the nature of the limbs of the fossil Paytnocaripa, we have to be guided solely by analogy, often an 1 The abdomen is nine-jointed, unless the last somite be considered as the telson (it is post-anal). It is a long and slender segment, and bears two very long narrow setigerous cercopods, closely resem- bling those of the Copepoda. 2 Claus, translated by Sedgwick (Cambridge), p. 448 (footnote) ; 8vo, 1884. The Leptostraca (Claus) are thus defined : “ Crustacea with thin folded carapaces, mostly bivalved, under which all the thoracic rings remain as free segments” (Zittel, ‘ Handb. Palaeontol.,’ 1885, p. 655%. 3 Claus, in ‘Siebold und Kolliker’s Zeitschrift,’ vol. xxii, 1872, p. 329. THE PHYLLOCARIDA. 7 uncertain and delusive guide. But in the absence of any evidence to the contrary there is every reason to suppose that the appendages of the head, thorax, and abdomen were on the type of Nebalia, since there is such a close correspondence in the form of the carapace, rostrum, and abdomen. But whatever may be the differences between the fossil forms represented by Ceratiocaris, &c., they certainly seem to approach Nebalia much nearer than any other known type of Crustacea ; they do not belong to the Decaropa; they present a vague and general resemblance to the zoéa or larva of the Decapods, but no zoéa has a telson, though one is developed in a postzoéal stage; they do not belong to any other Malacostracous type, nor do they belong to any existing Entomostracous type, using those terms in the oldsense. No naturalist or paleontologist has referred them with certainty to the Decapods or to any other Crustacean type than the Phyllopods. To this type (in the opinion of Metschnikoff and Claus, who have studied them most closely) they certainly do not belong, and thus reasoning by exclusion they either belong to the group of which Nebaliais a type or they are members of a lost, extinct group. The natural conclusion, in the light of our present knowledge, is that they are members of the group represented by the existing Nebalia.” The differential characters separating them from the Decapods or any other Malacostracous type are— 1. The loosely-attached carapace, the two halves connected by an adductor muscle. 2. The movable rostrum, loosely attached to the carapace. 3. The very long and large mandibular palpus, the long slender appendage of the first maxilla, and the very long bi-ramous maxille. 4. The absence of any maxillipeds. 5. The eight pairs of pseudo-Phyllopod thoracic feet, not adapted for walking. [To these we would add—5a. The ‘telson’ long and slender, with two long narrow setigerous cercopods as in the Copepoda. | 6. The animal swimming on its back. 7. No zoéa-formed larva. The characters which separate it from the Phyllopods are— 1. Carapace not hinged ; a rostrum present. 2. Two pairs of well-developed long and large multiarticulate antenns; the hinder pair, in the male, longer than the first pair. 3. The thorax and its appendages clearly differentiated from the abdomen.” Nebalia has been so long regarded as the surviving representative of those more ancient and gigantic forms of PHytLocaripA, which existed in such numbers in the Cambrian and Silurian Seas, and became nearly extinct towards the close 1¢ American Naturalist,’ 1882, vol. xvi, p. 851; and ‘Monograph N.-Amer. Phyllopods,’ &c., 1883, pp. 447-8. 8 BRITISH PALASOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. of the Carboniferous epoch, that any decision affecting its zoological position cannot be a matter of indifference to the paleontologist. But after studying its larval development and adult structural modifications, we arrive at the fact that Nebalia is a more generalised type than is ordinarily to be found at the present day, “combining Copepod, Phyllopod, and Decapod-like features, with other more fundamental characters of its own” (Packard), which preclude us from regarding it as a true Malacostracan, and, although ancestrally related to that order, it nevertheless does not attain, in our opinion, to the Mala- costracan grade of development.’ The group should therefore be arranged in a dis- tinct order (the PayLiocaripa) between the Enromostraca and the Maacostraca, as suggested by Claus. But if it is undesirable to have such an outstanding group, then we contend that the balance turns in favour of retaining it in the former division, if not in the order Puytuopopa as heretofore. Thus we conclude— 1. Some of the supposed ‘‘ Phyllopod shields” from the Hifel and elsewhere are probably Aptychi of Goniatites. 2. That for others of the Palzozoic Phyllopods, described in our Reports of 1883-84 (British Association), this explanation is inadmissible. 3. That those which cannot be referred to Aptychi are still, in all probability, Phyllopods (Phyllocarids). 4, That the Nebalia-like forms, now placed in the order PHyYLLocaripa, are certainly not Decapods. And even if they may not with propriety be retained any longer in the old order Puyiiopopa (of which we are by no means sure), yet they may more correctly be placed beside them in the Entomostraca than in the Mata- OosTRACA, Seeing they have not actually attained to the grade of the latter, but only approached to its larval development; whilst with the former the adult Nebalia has many very strong points of affinity. Crratiocarip®.—Dr. Packard’s observations on the structure of the Phyllopods, and his studies of the comparative anatomy of living and fossil forms, supply the paleontologist with sound reasoning in referring the Phyllocarida to the Nebaliad type as a centre for a great group of obscure fossil forms, and as a starting-point for the Decapoda. We have referred to his views in some detail in the foregoing pages, and it is our present intention to treat of the group typified by Cerariocaris, which has more than others a strict alliance to the recent Nebalia. 1 Dr. Packard writes “‘ There is little to indicate that the Schizopods (ysis, &c.) have descended from a Nebalia-like form, but rather from some accelerated zoéa form; while the Phyllocarida have had no Decapod blood in them, so to say, but have descended by a separate line from Copepod-like ancestors, and culminated, and even began to disappear, before any Malacostraca, at least in any numbers, appeared ” (‘ American Naturalist,’ 1882, vol. xvi, p. 873). In his “ Report on the Schizopoda collected by the Challenger,’’ 1885, and “ On the Phyllocarida,” 1887, Prof. G. O. Sars treats of Nedalia as being not a true Phyllopod, but a “ Copepodiform Branchiopod ;”’ p. 5. CERATIOCARIS. 9 In describing the parts in the fossil forms, we have to deal with— 1. The two valves of the carapace, and the rostrum in front between them (rarely present). Their ventral rim, raised, and occasionally pitted with the bases of lost sete or prickles. Their superficial ornament. In some allied forms tubercles or nodes are present, one of which may be distinguished as an optic tubercle or eye- spot; while others are due to the mawille (teeth), or other mouth-organs, or to places of attachment for the buccal muscles of the masticatory apparatus. The cephalic region of the valve is sometimes marked off from the thoracic by a shght sulcus (the nuchal furrow ?). 2. The somites or abdominal segments vary in number; some are covered by the carapace, others exposed. Their articulation ; superficial ornament ; occasional prickles ; their appendages (wropods) rare; and terminal spines. The wultvmate segment has its own special characteristics. 3. The caudal appendages or spines, consisting of a median telson’ (wrosome) or style, and two smaller lateral stylets or cercopods. Their ridges and furrows, and pits, indicating bases of little spines or spinules, former sete, fringes, or fimbrie. The prowvmal end of the telson has often its special ornamentation. Genus Crratiocaris, M‘Coy, 1849. 1839. Onchus, Agassiz (in part). In Murchison’s ‘Silurian System,’ p. 607. 1848. — Phillips (in part). ‘Mem. Geol. Surv.,’ vol. ii, Part 1, p. 226. 1849. Pterygotus, M‘Coy. ‘Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ ser. 2, vol. iv, p. 394. 1849. Ceratiocaris, M‘Coy. ‘ Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ ser. 2, vol. iv, p, 412. 1851. Ceratiocaris, M‘Coy. ‘ Brit. Paleeoz. Fossils,’ Fasc. 1, p. 136. 1851. Pterygotus, M‘Coy. ‘ Brit. Paleeoz. Fossils,’ Fasc. 1, p. 175. 1851. Leptocheles, M‘Coy. ‘ Brit. Paleoz. Fossils,’ Fasc. 1, p. 176. 1851. Pterygotus (Leptocheles), Bronn. ‘ Lethewa Geognost.,’ vol. i, Part 1, p. 40. 1852. Onchus, James Hall. ‘Geol. Surv. New York, Paleontology,’ vol. 11, p- 320. 1852. Ceratiocaris, Bronn. ‘ Lethzea Geogn.,’ vol. i, Part 2, p. 539. 1853. Dithyrocaris, Geinitz. ‘ Verst. Grauwack. Sachsen,’ Heft ii, p. 23. 1853. Leptocheles, M‘Coy. ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. ix, p. 13. 1853. Ceratiocaris (Leptocheles), Barrande. ‘Neues Jahrb. fiir Min.,’ &c., 1853, Heft ini, p. 342. 1858. Dithyrocaris ?, D. Sharpe. ‘Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. ix, p. 158. 1854. Ceratiocaris et Leptocheles, Murchison. ‘ Siluria,’ 1st. edit., p. 236. 1854. Ceratiocaris, Morris. ‘ Catal. Brit. Foss.,’ 2nd edit., p. 102. 1856. -—- Salter. ‘Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol xii, p. 33. 1 This is really the last joint (somite) of the abdomen. 2 10 BRITISH PALASOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. 1859. Ceratiocaris, James Hall. ‘Geol. Surv. New York, Palzentology,’ vol. ii, 1859. 1860. 1863. 1865. 1865. 1865. 1866. 1866. 1867. 1868. US 7Ale 1872. 1872. 1873. 1873. 1873. 1874. 1876. 1877. W877. 1878. 1878. 1878. 1880. 1882. 1883. p. 240. Salter. In Murchison’s ‘ Siluria,’ 2nd edit. (8rd, including ‘Sil. Syst.’), pp. 262, 538. Salter. ‘Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ ser. 3, vol. v, p. 158. James Hall. ‘ Sixteenth Ann. Rep. of the Regents, State Cabinet, New York,’ p. 72, pl. 1. J. W. Salter and H. Woodward. ‘Catal. and Chart of Foss. Crustacea,’ p. 17. H. Woodward. ‘Geol. Mag.,’ vol. u, p. 401. Huxley and Etheridge. ‘Catal. Foss. Mus. Pract. Geol.,’ joe De H. Woodward. ‘Geol. Mag.,’ vol. ii, p. 203. Salter. ‘ Mem. Geol. Surv.,’ vol. ii, p. 294. Salter. In Murchison’s ‘ Siluria,’ 3rd. edit. (4th, including ‘Sil. Syst.’), pp. 236 and 516. Bigsby. ‘Thesaurus Siluricus,’ p. 73. H. Woodward. ‘Geol. Mag.,’ vol. viii, p. 104. H. Woodward. ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ vol. ix, p. 564; and ‘ Report Brit. Assoc.’ for 1872, p. 323. Barrande. ‘Syst. Sil. Bohéme,’ vol. i, Suppl., p. 437. Salter. ‘Cat. Cambr. and Sil. Foss. Woodw. Mus.,’ p. 177. R. Etheridge, junr. ‘Mem. Geol. Surv. Scotl., Expl. Map 23,’ p. 93. Marschall. ‘Nomenclator Zoologicus,’ p. 404. R. Etheridge, Junr. ‘Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.,’ ser. 4, vol. KAO: Ferd. Roemer. ‘ Lethzea geognost,’ Theil i; ‘ Leth. paleo- zoica,’ Explanation of pl. 19. H. Woodward. ‘Catal. Brit. Foss. Crust.,’ p. 70. Miller. ‘ Catal. Paleeoz. Foss. America,’ p. 213. Huxley, Newton, and Htheridge. ‘Catal. Foss. Mus. Pract. Geol.,’ p. 84. Bigsby. ‘Thes. Devonico-Carbonif.,’ pp. 26, 246 and 247. Young. ‘Proceed. Roy. Phys. Soc. Hdin.,’ vol. iv, p. 168. Whitfield. ‘Amer. Journ. Sci.,’ ser. 3, vol. xix, p. 35. B. N. Peach. ‘Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin.,’ vol. xxx, part 1, Dade. A. §. Packard, junr. ‘Monogr. North-Amer. Phyllop. Crust.; Twelfth Ann. Rep. U.S. Geol. and Geograph. Survey,’ p. 450. CERATIOCARIS. 1 1883. Ceratiocaris, Fr. Schmidt. ‘ Mém. Imp. Acad. Sci. St.-Pétersb.,’ ser. 7, vol. xxxi, p. 84. 1883. — T.R.J.and H.W. ‘ Report Brit. Assoc. for 1883,’ p. 217. 1884. — C. E. Beecher. ‘‘ Ceratiocaridee Upper-Devonian Measures,” ‘Second Geol. Surv. Pennsylvania, P.P.P.,’ p. 2. 1884. — T.R.J.and H. W. “Second Report on Palzoz. Phyllop.,” ‘Report Brit. Assoc. for 1884,’ p. 95. 1884. — T. R. J. and H. W. ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ dec. 3, vol. i, pp. 356, 396. 1885. — O. Novdk. ‘Sitzungsb. k. bohm. Gesellsch. Wissensch.,’ Jahrg. 1885, p. 239. 1885. — T.R.J.and H. W. ‘Third Report Pal. Phyll., Brit. Assoc. for 1885,’ p. 334. 1885. _ H. Woodward. ‘Geol. Mag.,’ dec. 3, vol. ii, p. 349. 1885. — T. R. J. and H. W. Ibid., pp. 385 and 460. 1885. — J. M. Clarke. ‘ Geolog. Succession in Ontario Co., New York,’ pp. 18 and 20. 1886. — T. R. J. and H. W. ‘Fourth Report Pal. Phyll., Brit. Assoc. for 1886,’ p. 229. 1886. — T. R. Jones. ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ dec. 3, vol. ii, p. 456. The generic characters of Ceratiocaris have been described by M‘Coy, Salter, H. Woodward, and Barrande in their several works and memoirs referred to above and in the sequel. James Hall, R. P. Whitfield, A. 8. Packard, J. M. Clarke, Fr. Schmidt, C. E. Beecher, O. Novak, and others have added much information, general and special, on this and allied genera. The foregoing synonymy of the genus supplies references to published observations on Ceratiocaris and some of its allies. We offer the following diagnosis of Ceratiocaris. Carapace bivalved, probably with membranous attachment, no distinct hinge-joints being observable; valves subovate, semiovate, subquadrate, or trapezoidal; contracted in front, with the end sharp or rounded above the median line of the valve; more or less truncate behind. Rostrum elliptical in shape, of a single lanceolate piece, chevron-marked. Antenne (?) obscure. Maxillee often apparent. Body many-jointed, with fourteen or more segments, of which 4—7 extend beyond the carapace, ornamented with delicate raised lines. Some or all of these segments bore small lamelliform branchial appendages.’ Last segment the longest, supporting three caudal spines, namely : (1) a strong tapering telson (style), thick at the top or proximal end, usually with a trilobed articulating surface (resembling that in the telson of Limulus), pointed at the other, and more or less spinose, as shown by the bases of little prickles ; and (2) two shorter, simpler, lateral appendages (stylets). The surface * See the “ Sixth Report on Fossil Crustacea,” ‘ Brit. Assoc. Rep. for 1872,’ p. 323. 12 BRITISH PALAOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. of the valves has a linear ornament, and the ventral margin has a thin raised rim, furnished, in some instances, with small tubercles or a fine spinose fringe. Respecting the abdominal appendages which Mr. R. Etheridge, jun., described in Appendix III of the ‘Memoirs Geol. Survey Scotland, Explanation of Sheet 23,’ 1878, p. 93, he there remarks : ‘“‘ A further advance in the structure of this genus of Crustacea has been satisfactorily established from specimens obtained at Lesmahagow by the Collector of the Geological Survey, viz. the presence of respiratory locomotive appendages. On a slab of thin-bedded shale are exposed the abdominal segments, telson, and caudal appendages of a Ceratiocaris. From the ventral margin of the terminal segment, to which are attached the telson-spines (Leptocheles, M‘Coy), proceeds a broad, paddle-shaped, membranous (?) expansion, presenting a strong marginal outline, with a transversely striated surface. This is followed by another similar appendage, proceeding in the same manner from the penultimate segment (somite). Along the dorsal margin there is seen what appears to be the remains of one of the corresponding ‘ foot-gills,’ on the other side, bent back upon itself, and thus thrust out of place. The free ends of these foot-gills are attenuated to more or less rounded points. They do not show any evidence of having possessed a marginal fringe. The discovery of these branchial locomotive appendages tends to ally Ceratiocaris still further with the genus Nebalia. See ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ vol. ix, p. 564. Loc.: No. 292 (Linburn or Linn Burn, about two miles north of Muir- kirk, Lanarkshire). In thin-bedded shale (Upper Ludlow). Collected by A. Macconochie.” Fie. 1. Fie. 2. Fra. 1.—Abdominal segments and caudal spines of Ceratiocaris stygia, with indications of branchial lamella or uropods, Geol. Surv. Mus. Edin., M. 101, Linburn. Fie. 2.—Abdominal segments and caudal spines of Ceratiocaris papilio, with indications of uropod, Geol. Surv. Mus. Edinb., M. 94, Linburn Mr. R. Etheridge, jun., again alludes to this interesting subject in the ‘ Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist.’ ser. 4, vol. xiv, 1874, p. 9. Some of the abdominal segments seem to exhibit joint-marks or surfaces of articulation adapted for appendages rather than for union with the next somite. Jompare PI. ITI, fig. 3. Ceratiocaris leptodactylus (M‘Coy) and C. Murchisoni (Agassiz), having been the first recorded species, will be here described first. CERATIOCARIS. 13 The following is a list of the British Paleozoic Curatiocartpm and allies, as at present known, and treated of in this portion of the Monograph. PLATES PLATES 1. Ceratiocaris leptodactylus, M‘Coy. VI, X | 19. Ceratiocaris Oretonensis, H. W. x 2. — Murchisoni, (Agass.), III, IV, V, VI | 20. — truncata, H. W. x 8. — valida, T. R. J. & H.W. VI | 21. — solenoides, M‘Coy. VIII 4, — tyrannus, Salter. IIT, 1V, V, IX | 22. — gobiiformis, T.R. J. & H. W. VIII 5. — gigas, Salter. Ill, IV, V | 23. — Salteriana, T. R. J. & H. W. Vil 6. — Halliana, T. R.J.& H.W. II, IV, V | 24. — lava, T. R. J. & H. W. Vill, X 7. — Pardoéana, La Touche. V | 25. — compta, T. R. J. & H. W. VII 8. — canaliculata, T. R. J. & H. W. IX | 26. — cassia, Salter. VII 9. — Ludensis, H. W. I, IX | 27. — cassioides, T. R. J. & H.W. III, IV, VIL 10. — papilio, Salter. XI, XII | [28. C.? longicauda (Sharpe), Portuguese]. XI 11. — stygia, Salter. X, XI, XII | 29. ©. decora, Phillips. 12. — longa, sp. nov. VI, XI | 30. C.? lata, Salter. 13. — robusta, Salter. X, XI | 31. C.? insperata, Salter. 14. — patula, sp. nov. Xs s2, (Cre sp. 15. — angusta, T. R. J. & H. W. X | 33. C.? perornata, Salter. 16. — minuta, T. R. J. & H.W. X, XI} 1. Xiphocaris ensis (Salter). V 17. — inornata, M‘Coy. X | 1. Physocaris vesica, Salter. Vil 18. — Ruthveniana, T. R. J. & H. W. xX Ocunatse Forms. 1. Emmelezoe elliptica (M‘Coy). Vill 2. — crassistriata, T. R. J. & H. W. VIII 3. — tenuistriata, T. R. J. & H. W. VII t — Maccoyiana, T. R. J. & H.W. Vill In acknowledging the obligations we owe to numerous friends who have aided us in becoming acquainted with all the specimens illustrative of the above- mentioned species, we must refer to the names associated with them in our descriptions ; also to the Officers of the several Museums from which we have been granted the loan of specimens to draw and describe. We cordially thank the Artists for the care shown in so admirably illustrating this Monograph. Norr.—The specimens indicated in this Monograph as Oxford Museum a—v, and those indicated as Ludlow Museum a—tv, were examined and so marked by us in those Museums. Those in the Cambridge Museum, the British Museum, and the Museum of Practical Geology are indicated in this Monograph by the labels attached to them in those collections. 14 BRITISH PALAOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. 1. CERaTiooaRIs LEPTODAOTYLUS (M‘Ooy), 1849. Plate VI, figs. 4a, 4b, 4c, 5, 6 (?), (cen See al Tells 2 Salles teh ())e 1849. Preryaorus LEPropactrius, M‘Ooy. Ann. Mag. and Nat. Hist., ser. 2, vol. iv, p. 394. 1851. aa — — Synops. Brit. Palwoz. Foss., Fase. i, p. 176, pl. 1) EB, figs. 7) 7a, 006 (not figs. 7e, 7d). 1853. LeprocHEetEs — a Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. ix, p- 13. 1859. _ — Murchison. Siluria, 2nd (8rd) ed., p. 263, 538. 1860. CERATIOOARIS —_ Salter. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 3, vol. v, p- 157. 1867. LxrprocHELes (CERATIOCARIS) LEPTODACTYLUS, Salter. In Siluria, 3rd (4th) ed., p. 237. 1867. CERATIOCARIS LEPTODACTYLUS, Salter. Ibid., p. 516. 1873. — — = Catal. Camb. Sil. Foss., p. 164. 1877. —_ — H. Woodward. Catal. Brit. Foss. Crust., p.71. 1878. _ Morcuisoni (part), Hualey, Newton & Etheridge. Catal. Foss., M. P. G., p. 84. 1885. — LEPTODACTYLUS, T. R. Jones & H. Woodward. Third Report on Palwoz. Phyllop., Brit. Assoc. Rep., p. 339; Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. ii, p. 388. 1886. — == — Fourth Rep., Brit. Assoc. Rep., p. 229; Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. iti, p. 456. Some imperfect specimens (Cambridge Museum, a/923 and a/924) of the delicate caudal appendages of a Ceratiocaris (Pl. VI, figs. 4, 5) from Leintwardine, in Shropshire,’ were referred by Prof. M‘Coy at first to a chelate limb of Ptery- gotus, and then to that of a different but allied genus (Leptocheles). Ultimately Mr. Salter gave them their true place in Ceratiocaris. In 1877 this species was grouped with C. Murchisoni in the ‘ Catalogue of British Fossil Crustacea,’ p. 71; and it was regarded as a variety of that species, also, in our ‘ Third Report on Palzozoic Phyllopoda,’ 1885, pp. 8386—339. We now find, however, that it is different both as to size and proportion; and we have detected two rows of little 1 The very rich localities for Silurian Phyllopods in the neighbourhood of Ludlow are enumerated and described in the Rev. J. D. La Touche’s ‘ Manual of the Geology of Shropshire,’ 1884, pp. 26, 27, especially Ludford Lane, Bow Bridge, Leintwardine, Church Hill, and Trippleton Farm. In his ‘Record of the Rocks,’ 1872, p. 124, &., the Rev. W.S. Symonds notices Ludlow and its environs from a geologist’s point of view. See also ‘Siluria,’ 1867, chap. vii, pp. 123, et seq. CERATIOCARIS LEPTODACTYLUS. 15 pits, which were the bases of set, on the exposed surface of one of the specimens in the University Museum at Cambridge (PI. VI, fig. 4). In each case we have only caudal spines to deal with; but M‘Coy’s specimens (‘ Brit. Pal. Foss.,’ pl. 1 H, figs. 7, 7 a, 7 b) are much more slender than Murchison’s (‘Sil. Syst.,’ pl. 4, figs. 10 and 64, and ‘Siluria,’ last edit., pl. 19, figs. 1, 2), and less strongly ribbed; and therein they have specific differences. Some similar caudal appendages (Mus. Pract. Geol. 44) occur in the Lower- Wenlock Rock of Helm Knot, Dent, Yorkshire. Some doubtful fragments of ulti- mate segments of the abdomen are shown in Pl. VI, fig. 6, and Pl. X, fig. 8. In 1860 Mr. Salter apportioned to this species a certain kind of carapace which we think belongs to a new species (C. Halliana, which see further on). Pl. VI, figs. 4a, 46, 4c. Cambridge Museum a/924. Described and figured by M‘Coy, ‘ Brit. Pal. Foss.,’ 1851, pl. 1 H, figs. 7 and 76, as Pterygotus leptodactylus, from Leintwardine. This specimen is in faintly greenish-grey mudstone, slightly calcareous along thin seams at the edge. It consists of a small fragment (smaller than when figured by M‘Coy) of the distal (lower) end of an ultimate segment, longitudi- nally striate, and a ridged telson. The latter, not fully exposed at the end, retains portions of its test; some of these pieces, low down, are small, but the proximal portion or head of this telson is well characterised by its leaf-marked or latticed test (4a, 4c). The junction of segment and telson have been disturbed by pressure. The outer ridge of the telson and the third ridge inwards bear numerous marks of the bases of small prickles (figs. 4a, 4b, 4c). Whether the outer edge repre- sents the back or the side of the dorsal ridge (that is, if it bore more than the one visible row of marks) is doubtful; the telson may have had a double row of prickles along its back, one on each side of the ridge. The inner row on the third ridge is an interesting and special feature. Figure 5 (Cambridge Museum a/923). Described and figured by M‘Coy (‘ Brit. Pal. Foss.,’ pl. 1 EK, fig. 7a). In olive-grey sandstone, not calcareous. From Leint- wardine. A longitudinally ridged telson, badly preserved, but retaining a striated fragment of ferruginous crust. Pl. VI, figs. 6, 7, 8,9. Museum Practical Geology +4 123, Labelled “CO. Murchisoni, M‘Coy, Coniston Grit.,, Helm Knot, Dent, Yorkshire. Collected by Prof. M‘K. Hughes.” See also ‘Catal. Cambr. Silur. Fossils,’ 1878, p. 84, and ‘Geol. Mag.’ vol. i, p. 205. Hard, olive-green, and brownish mudstone, not cal- careous, with poorly-preserved ferruginous impressions. Fig. 6. Probably part of an ultimate segment, longitudinally striated. The obscure, irregular, deeper, and continuous hollow may possibly have reference to a telson. Fig. 7. A style (broken) and two stylets. All ridged throughout; the first * Equivalent to the “ Wenlock Shale” (Lower Wenlock). 16 ~ BRITISH PALAOZOIC PHYLLOCARIDA. bearing indications of two rows of the bases of prickles on its upper portion, and thus corresponding with fig. 4; it is imperfect at the end. The others are pro- bably perfect in length. Fig. 8. SOE M00: Ratio. of body-whorl to shell : : = 60100: Spiral angle : 78°. Shell conoidal; spire about four-tenths of the entire rent Whorls five to six, angular, and broadly tabulate. Keels coarsely crenulate, and scarcely upturned. Costze of the spiral whorls wide apart, and not prominent ; anterior two-thirds of body-whorl scarcely costated, though the cost are continuous across the flat area. Spirals coarse and few in number. Aperture ovate. Columella short, and slightly reflexed, with a very broad and shallow groove. Umbilicus sometimes well marked. Relations and Distribution—In the tabulate character of the whorls, and to a certain extent also in the height of the spire, this species approaches P. bellona of the type shown in figures 5 a—f, and the very ovate aperture, and wide and shallow canaliculation, still further connect it. I have, however, other specimens where the canaliculation is stronger, and more like that of the species next described. Rare in the Inferior Oolite of Dorsetshire. PURPURINA. 91 8. PuURPURINA ASPERA, sp. nov. Plate I, figs. 1l a,b; lle,d; lle. Description : Length of a well-grown specimen : . 26mm. Ratio of width to length ‘ ; ~ fo. 100; Length of body-whorl to entire shell : = 60% 100: Spiral angle : 10", Shell ovate-conoidal; spire rather more than four: tenths of the entire length. Whorls seven in number, angular ; posterior area sloping outwards, anterior area sloping inwards. Keels submedian, and coarsely crenulate where the longitu- dinals or costz cross over. Coste few but prominent, and well-continued through- out the body-whorl except in the neigbourhood of the columella. The spirals on the posterior area of the whorls are fine and numerous, those on the anterior area are few in number (about three on the whorls of the spire), coarse and wavy. The spirals in the base are thicker and much striated longitudinally. Shell substance very thick. Aperture subquadrate and rather restricted ; columella encrusted and strongly reflexed, so that the anterior canaliculation is, very pronounced. Umbilical slit narrowed and long. Relations and Distribution.—This fine and characteristic Purpurine is, in many respects, widely removed from P. elaborata, and yet these two species are connected through the variety pagoda, and the numerous other varieties of P. bellona. Also, instead of the shallow anterior groove of that species, P. aspera is deeply canali- culate. These very coarsely ornamented forms are characteristic of the Sowerbyi-bed of Bradford Abbas, where P. aspera is moderately abundant. The specimen, Pl. I, fig. 2, is also from the Sowerbyi-bed of Bradford Abbas. It is an exceptional form, but I have not ventured to name it. 9. Purrurina caLoaR, sp. nov. Plate II, figs. 1 a, b Description : Length 3 : ‘ ; 19 mm. Ratio of width to iongen ‘ ; , 80): 100. Length of body-whorl to entire shell ‘ « 602100. Spiral angle : ‘ : PAS, Shell conical. Whorls about six, very angular; posterior area slightly sloping outwards, anterior area slightly sloping inwards. Keels of the whorls of the spire 92 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. strongly crenulate, keel of the body-whorl enormously so. Cost wide apart, scarcely traceable anteriorly, but strongly developed below the keel, though dying out towards the base of the shell. Spirals above the keel fine and numerous; few and wide apart (two or at most three) below the keel. The body-whorl, including the base, has ten spirals. Aperture subquadrate with an extremely short columella, strongly reflexed, so as to produce a notch of considerable depth. Hardly any trace of umbilicus. Relations and Distribution.—Kvidently related to the last-named species, P. calcar is extremely rare in the Sowerbyi-bed of Bradford Abbas. In this form we perceive the coarsest ornamentation of any species of Purpwrina known to me. Inflata Group. 10. Purrurina inFuata, Tawney, 1850. Plate II, figs. 2 a, 6,c; 2d,e; 2f. 1873. Purpurina 1nFuata, Tawney. Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 4, pl. iii, fig. 9. Bibliography, §c.—Mr. Tawney need not have apologised for making this species, which is much nearer to P. Sowerbyi, Waagen, than to P. coronata, Héb. and Desl., with which he tried to identify it. Description : Length of a well-grown shell. 3 . 24mm. Ratio of width to length ; : ~~ S80 S00: Length of body-whorl to entire shell ~ aie 100: Spiral angle : 93°. Shell ovate-globose ; spire about three-tenths of the entire length. Whorls five to six, tumid, but flattened posteriorly and markedly canaliculate. Body-whorl much inflated. The longitudinals or coste are numerous, regular, of moderate force, and with a slight slope from left to right. On the shoulder of the whorls each rib terminates in a slight spinous projection, forming a closely crenulated keel; the coste extend about half way down the body-whorl. The spirals are fine, numerous, and regular, but are not seen to extend over the flat area. Aperture ovate to semilunar, with a short and scarcely inflexed columella in the more adult specimens. In younger specimens the anterior groove is better marked, and the umbilical slit is also more apparent. Relations and Distribution.—This species may be regarded as typical of the more globular forms of Purpurina, which are found both in the Inferior Oolite of the Anglo-Norman basin, and also in the Callovian of Montreuil-Bellay. It is undoubtedly near to P. Sowerbyi, Waagen, but rather more tabulate. PURPURINA. 93 P. inflata is characteristic of the Parkinsoni-zone of Burton Bradstock and the neighbourhood. The Sauzei-bed at Oborne also yields it, and specimens resembling . this species are in Mr. Buckman’s collection, said to come from Hast Coker, zone unknown. It also occurs at Dundry, and in the Inferior Oolite of Rodborough Hill, and Cold Comfort. In Normandy it is fairly abundant in the “ Oolithe ferrugineuse,”’ whence many fine specimens are to be seen in Prof. Deslongchamps’ collection. 11. Purpurina: Cf. Sowsrsy1, Waagen, 1867. Not figured. 1867. Purrurina SowerByt, Waagen. Zone of Am. Sowerbyi, in Benecke, p. 105, pl. v, figs. 3, 4a, b,¢. A globose Purpurina which differs from P. inflata, in having the shoulder of the whorl sloping, and scarcely canaliculate, is of rare occurrence in the Sowerbyi- bed of Bradford Abbas. The spire also is rather shorter, and the cost have a more decided inclination from left to right. 12. Porpurina ROTUNDA, sp. nov. Plate II, figs. 3 a,b, ¢; 3 d. Description : Length of well-grown shell : ‘ . 23 mm. Ratio of width to length : « (257 100. Length of body-whorl to entire shell ’ « 682100" Spiral angle 5 ‘ 207 Shell ovate-globose, rather widely umbilicated. Whorls five to six, tumid and canaliculate near the suture; body-whorl much inflated. The costx are feebly developed cn the whorls of the spire, and more or less effaced on the body-whorl. The spirals are numerous and regular in their increase and relative distance. Aperture widely ovate, with but slight traces of canaliculation. Relations and Distribution.—Though not more tumid than P. inflata this is the most globose of all the Purpurines. It is further distinguished by a good sized, circular umbilicus. The aperture is, perhaps, the least canaliculate of any known species. Rare in the Sowerbyi-bed of Bradford Abbas and Stoford. 94 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. 13. PurPurINA TABULATA, sp. nov. Plate II, figs. 4 a, 6, ¢. Description : Length of a large specimen : : . 20 mm. Ratio of width to length : J - 802100. Length of body-whorl to entire shell ; 702100: Spiral angle é : OOF Shell conoidal, subglobose, almost imperforate. Whorls about six, angular and widely tabulate, slightly tumid on the flanks. The longitudinal ornament is very feeble, especially in the body-whorl; it is better shown on the tabular area, where the coste are split by lines of growth. The keels are delicately crenulate. The spirals are regular, numerous, and rather fine; they do not extend over the tabular area. Aperture ovate to subquadrate, wide, and bearing considerable resemblance to that of P. elaborata. A less tumid variety (Pl. II, fig. 4 d, e), with better developed cost, serves to connect this species with P. curta (Pl. I, fig. 6 a, b), which, however, has well- developed costz and a somewhat longer spire. This variety might be called P. SUBCORONATA. Relations and Distribution.— P. tabulata is near to P. coronata, H. and D. (‘ Foss. Mont.-Bellay,’ p. 25, pl. i, fig. 7), but that small and tabulate species is beautifully cancellated. . Rather rare in the Sowerbyi-bed of Bradford Abbas and Stoford. The following list summarises the results as regards the Purpurines, strictly so called, of the Inferior Oolite in England. Bellona Group. Purpurina elaborata, M. and L. Purpurina curta, sp. nov. — *aperta.”’ — _ parcicosta, sp. nov. = cancellata, sp. nov. — aspera, sp. nov. — bellona, D’Orb. — ealcear, sp. nov. “= a — var. pagoda. Inflata Group. Purpurina inflata, Tawney, Purpurina rotunda, sp. nov. — ef. Sowerbyi, Waagen. — tabulata, sp. nov. PURPURINA (EUCYCLOIDEA). 95 Section IJ.—Purrurtna, Auctorum nonnullorum. A considerable modification in the diagnosis of the genus is required to admit the following species ; where the spire is longer, the body-whorl less tumid, and the whole shell angular and eucycloid. Indeed, I should prefer to distinguish this group as Hucycloidea—small shells with carinated whorls; carinze median and crenulate ; aperture rhomboidal, with a short and narrow anterior canaliculation. 14, Purporina (Hucyctorpea) sranor, D’Orbigny, 1850. Plate II, figs. 5 a, 6, c; 5d,e; 5f, 9, h. 1850. Turso Branor, D’Orbigny. Prod. 1, Bt. 10, p. 266. 1852. Purpurina Branor, D’Orbigny. Ter. Jur. 2, pl. 331, figs. 14, 15. 1860. Cf. also Purpurina Granutatra, Héb. and Desl. Foss. de Montreuil- Bellay, p. 28, pl. 7, fig. 9. Bibliography, J§c.—I can find no adequate description of P. bianor. In the Prodrome, D’Orbigny merely says that T. bianor is near to T. belia, but more elongate, more carinate in the middle of the whorls, and without crenulations. Occurs at Port-en-Bessin. In the ‘ Terrains Jurassiques’ no text accompanies the figure of P. bianor. On the other hand, our shell greatly resembles specimens from Normandy, which Prof. Deslongchamps and other paleontologists refer without hesitation to P. bianor, D’Orb. These occur in the beds of Bayeux. P. granulata, H. and D., greatly resembles some of the larger specimens from Vitney Cross, but on the whole the ornamentation of P. granulata is richer, especially on the carinz. But if the Vitney Cross specimens were as well preserved as those from the Callovian of Montreuil-Bellay, it might, perhaps, be more difficult to indicate the difference. Description : Length of a well-grown shell _ . : 2) 13mm, Ratio of width to length ; : . 65:100. Length of body-whorl to entire shell : = oo LOO; Spiral angle : ; yah-00 Shell conical, eucycloid; spire nearly half the length of the shell, apex sharp. Whorls about seven in well-grown specimens, very angular, having a strong keel, which is median in the whorls of the spire; body-whorl with one strong keel, and showing no distinctive base. The keels are regularly and finely crenulate (differing 96 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. from D’Orbigny’s description), and where this is not so, it would seem to be the result of wear. The spirals are often faint, except in the lower part of the body- whorl, where they are more prominent ; but there is much variation in this respect. On the whole, the spirals are fewer and stronger in the anterior than in the posterior area of each whorl, and in well preserved specimens are seen to be decussated with fine longitudinal striz. Aperture subquadrate, inclining to rhomboidal; columella scarcely reflexed ; anterior groove more marked in some specimens than in others. Umbilical slit variable. felations and Distributions. —The forms described below, viz. P. ‘‘ fusiformis”’ and P. carino-crenata, are probably nothing more than varieties of the somewhat variable species identified as P. bianor. But this section of the genus Purpurina, as was noticed by Hébert and Deslongchamps in dealing with P. granulata, recalls the form of Amberleya (Hucyclus) with considerable force. It will be remembered that many species of eucycloid Purpwrine were figured by D’Orbigny in the ‘ Ter- raines Jurassiques,’ e.g. P. ornata, P. bathis, P. belia. Forms greatly resembling these our palzontologists have hitherto treated as belonging to the genus Amberleya. Itis difficult to say where the line should be drawn, since many of the shells referred to Amberleya show considerable anterior grooving when well preserved. Alto- gether, the section of Purpurina which contains P. bianor is anomalous, and full of difficulty, as we shall perceive in the sequel. In this country P. bianor is essentially a fossil of the Parkinsoni-zone, being fairly abundant in P,, Burton Bradstock Cliff, and in the same horizon at Vitney Cross, and Upper Loders. In North Dorset it occurs sparingly in the Parkinsoni- beds at Halfway House and Bradford Abbas. 15. Purpurtna (Evcyctorpga): Species or Variety related to P. pranor. Plate II, fies. 6 a, b. This shell differs from the preceding in having asomewhat smaller spiral angle, and in its more fusiform outline. The body-whorl presents a distinctly defined base, and the anterior portion of the whorls of the spire has less of an inward slope ; consequently the whorls are less angular. The keels are richly crenulate; the spirals above the keel consist of a well-marked line near the suture, and two others which are fainter; the spirals below the keel are two in number and stronger ; all are finely decussated by axial striae. Aperture imperfect, but probably like the preceding. It is not impossible that this form may be a poor representative of Turbo sub- PURPURINA (EUCYCLOIDEA). 97 angulatus, Miinst. (‘ Goldf. Petref.,’ t. 194, f. 5), a fossil of the Murchisone-zone iden- tified by Oppel with P. patroclus, D’Orb. (‘ Ter. Jur.’ 2, pl. 329, figs. 9—11). As a temporary name I propose that our shell be called “ Purpurina fusiformis.” It belongs to the Woodwardian Museum, and is marked “ Yeovil.” Hence I presume it is a fossil of the Lower Division of the Inferior Oolite. 16. Purpurtna (EucycLorpBa) cartNno-crenata, Lycett, 1853. Plate II, figs. 7 a, db. 1858. Fusus? cartno-crenatus, Lycett. Proc. Cotteswold Nat. Field Club, vol. i, p. 81. Description —“ Shell small, fusiform; spire of four volutions, keeled and striated; an elevated carina encircles the middle of each whorl, its edge undu- lated or crenulated; encircling striz cover the whole surface of the shell, and there is an indistinct circle of nodules upon the upper portion of each whorl near the junction.”’—Lycerr. The specimen now figured answers to the above description, except that possibly the spire may have had five whorls. It evidently belongs to the same section of Purpurina as P. bianor, but obviously differs in the smaller spiral angle, and in possessing a more defined base (not well shown in Fig. 7 a, b) ; in fact, the body-whorl may be regarded as distinctly bicarinate. The character, though not the details of the ornamentation, are similar. With ‘ P. fusiformis” it has closer affinities, but the Cotteswold shell is much feebler. This specimen is from the Lycett Collection in the Jermyn Street Museum, and is the only one known to me. The author quotes the species from the Inferior Oolite of Minchinhampton (op. cit., p. 73). Some other small fossils from the Inferior Oolite have lately turned up which may belong here, but at present it seems safer to reserve these to be dealt with subsequently, either by way of postscript or otherwise. Genus—Bracuytrema, Morris and Lycett, 1851, Great Ool. Moll., p. 24. ** Shell small, twisted, turbinated, solid. Whorls nodular, costated or cancellated ; the last whorl large and ventricose; columella smooth, rounded ; twisted near to the base, and reflecting outwards, forming a short oblique canal; aperture moderately subovate, less frequently thickened, and externally subvaricose.”’—Fiscusr, ‘ Man. Conch.,’ p. 685. 13 98 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. The above is in the main the original diagnosis of Morris and Lycett, which had to a certain extent been modified by Piette in 1856. To show the uncertainty which still prevails with regard to the family position of Brachytrema, I would refer to the partial list of genera, p. 12 of this Monograph. It will be seen that Fischer places the genus with a query under Cerithiide, Tryon places it under Littorinide or Cerithiide, Tate under Cerithiide provisionally, Stoliczka under Cerithiide. Morris and Lycett, on the other hand, originally regarded it as related to the Muricide. These shells are very scarce and poorly preserved in the Inferior Oolite of England, so that our opportunities for adding to the knowledge we possess of the genus have not been great. Omitting the more fusiform shells which have occasionally been referred to Brachytrema, two distinct groups are apparent, one of which is like Purpuroidea in its aspect (B. Wrightii) ; the other might with more justice be regarded as related to the family of the Cerithiide (B. subvaricosum). Thus the genus is to be regarded as a composite one, which possibly may be broken up when the subject has been more fully ventilated. 17. BracHyTREMA SUBVAkICOSUM, sp. nov. Plate II, figs. 9 a, b. Description : Length : : : . 6:25 mm. Width ; . 412 mm. Length of body-whorl to entire shell, about = 00/2 100 Spiral angle : ; ‘ 50° Shell small, subconical, apex pointed. Whorls six, nearly flat, and without strong sutural depressions. The ornaments consist of three stout, undulating spirals, which are wide apart, though somewhat fused together in the apical whorls. In the body-whorl a fourth spiral is developed; and in the base the spirals are fine and not numerous. The longitudinal ornamentation is irregular and not conspicuous, though slightly variciform in character. Aperture subquadrate and somewhat restricted, canal short, columella curved, notch narrow. Relations and Distribution—Brachytrema brevis, Piette (‘ Bull. Soc. Géol. France,’ 2me sér., vol. xii, p. 564, pl. xv, figs. 21, 22), believed to be nearly the same as Turbo pygmeus, M. and L. (‘ Great Ool. Moll.,’ p. 65, pl. ix, fig. 29), approaches this species very closely. B. subvaricosum is less depressed, and the longitudinal ornamentation is less sharply developed; the spirals are larger, wider apart, and less numerous than in Turbo pygmeus. B. varicosa, Lye. (‘ Suppl.,’ BRACHYTREMA. 99 p. 5, pl. 44, fig. 27), approaches our shell still more closely, but the spiral ornamen- tation of Lycett’s species is finer, more crowded, and more granulated. It is true that in all these cases the differences are chiefly connected with the ornamen- tation, and in this respect B. subvaricosum certainly differs from all known forms of Brachytrema in the Great Oolite of this country. It is possible that this may be the form described by Cossmann (p. 79, pl. xi, figs. 834 and 35) as Brachytrema brevis, Piette, said to be not uncommon in the Bajocian of the Meurthe-et-Moselle. Brachytrema subvaricosum occurs sparingly in the upper part of the Lincolnshire Limestone at Great Ponton. There is also a wide-angled variety, with the spirals very wide apart, which has been found at Weldon. 18. BRacHyTReMA BINODOsOUM, sp. nov. Pl. VII, fig. 12. Description.—This little shell differs from all others of the varicoswm-group in having two nodular spiral belts round the whorls, which give it an eucycloid aspect. A single specimen has been found at Great Ponton. 19. Bracuytrema Wricutil, Cotteau, 1855, var. pespecta. Plate II, figs. 8 a, b,c. 1860. Bracnytrema Wriautil, Cotteawu. Héb. and Desl., Foss. de Montreuil- Bellay, p. 21, pl. vii, figs. 7 a, 6, ¢. Description : Length . : : : » (fo Tata. Width : : : ; 6 mm. Body-whorl to entire shell, about ; - 55:100 Spiral angle : : : - Bor Shell conical; apex pointed. Whorls five, angular, and step-like; ornaments coarse ; three strong nodulated spirals on the anterior area of each whorl; the longitudinals consist of tolerably numerous stout coste which are very nodular over the angle of the whorl ; base rather flattened and ornamented by five spiral lines. Aperture subquadrate to circular; notch rather wide; scarcely any canal. Relations and Distribution—Owing to the indifferent preservation of the anterior margin of the only known specimen it is not easy fully to point out how the form now under consideration differs from Cotteau’s species. It is not much 100 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. more than one-third the size, is wider-angled, and has a flatter base ; the notch also is probably wider and more distinct. ‘There is an undescribed species of Brachy- trema in the Bajocian of Normandy (for a specimen of which I am indebted to the generosity of M. Deslongchamps), which greatly resembles this form, and also B. Wrightii, but yet has points of difference from both. These differences are probably not more than varietal. B. Wrightii and its allies represent the group of Brachy- tremas which are related to Purpuroidea. In the well-preserved specimens of the French Bajocian it is possible to note this relationship. The variety despecta is founded on a unique specimen from P, Vitney Cross (see p. 38), and is the only Brachytrema that has hitherto to my knowledge been found in the Inferior Oolite of England outside of the Lincolnshire Limestone. If additional evidence as to its differing materially from B. Wrightii should be obtained, the species may be known as BracuyrrEMA DESPECTUM. Famity APORRHAIDA. Shell turrited, aperture continued in front by an imperfect canal or a groove ; lip expanded, aliform or digitate.’’—FiscHnr. The Inferior Oolite, in England, contains three genera, which may be referred to this family, viz. Malaptera, Piette, Spinigera, D’Orbigny, and Alaria, Morris and Lycett. These genera are probably of unequal value, and it might perhaps be difficult to give a very rigorous and logical definition of any one of them, so linked are they to all appearance by connecting forms. Besides the three named genera there are one or two species of the Aporrhaide, which seem rather difficult to place under any of the above. The Cretaceous Aporrhaidz have received a considerable amount of atten- tion from Mr. J. Starkie Gardner,’ and, in common with some other concho- logists, he failed to see any difference of generic value between Alaria and the existing Aporrhais. However, Fischer clearly endorses Piette’s view as to the propriety of keeping Aporrhais distinct from at least the bulk of the shells usually referred to Alaria ; and the farther we go back in time, the more the Alaria-group predominates over the others, until its origin is lost in the small and often obscure forms, which a minute and careful search is gradually revealing from the Lias. «On the Gault and Cretaceous Aporrhaidew,” by J. Starkie Gardner, F.G.S., ‘ Geological Magazine,’ 1875. MALAPTERA. 101 Genus—Mataprera, Piette. ** Shell thin, fusiform or ovoid, wing very large, multidigitate, palmate, investing, bent back, extended on the columellar side, and sometimes on the posterior portion of the spire ; anterior canal placed wpon an expansion which forms part of the wing, and consisting of a wide furrow bent backwards as in Aporrhais.”—FIscHeEr. Such a genus as this possesses more resemblance to the existing Aporrhais than the average Jurassic Alaria does. Indeed, Cossmann (‘ Etage Bathonien,’ p. 71) regards Malaptera as merely a subgenus of Aporrhais. Most of these shells were formerly referred to Pterocera, Lamarck. 20. MabapTsra BENTLEYI, Morris and Lycett, 1851. Plate III, figs. 1 a, 10, le. 1851. Prerocera Bentieyi, Morris and Lycett. Great Ool.-Moll., p. 15, pl. iii, figs. 15, 15a. 1854. _ — — Morris, Catalogue, p. 274. Cf. also CueNnopus Picraviensis, D'Orbigny. Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Franc., pl. xiv, fig. 9, and pl. xix, figs. 10 and 11. Bibliography, §c.—This is an Inferior-Oolite species described by Morris and Lycett as from the Great Oolite; but no similar form is known in the Great Oolite of this country. Description : Length of a full-sized specimen . . 32mm. Ratio of width to length : ‘ . 46: 100. Spiral angle : : 36°. Shell turrited, spiral angle rather convex, apex blunt. Whorls angular and tumid ; posterior third of each whorl marked with very fine spiral lines, for the most part scarcely visible ; the anterior two-thirds carries four strong spiral lines. Body-whorl moderately large, and nearly equal to the length of the spire. It is ornamented by six strong spirals, from which the digitations of the wing arise. The wing embraces a very considerable portion of the spire. The posterior digitations are the strongest and also the widest apart, the first one being bent upwards, so as to form an angle of about 10° with the axis of the spire and nearly straight ; the three anterior digitations are less strong, and project much less farther from the edge of the palmated portion of the wing; they are bent downwards in an 102 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. increasing ratio. The anterior portion of the wing is ornamented by numerous fine lines. The principal digitations are six, but a subordinate seventh occurs. The aperture is short and nearly quadrate; the six or seven furrows of the wing, corresponding to the digitations, radiate from the outer lip, and the posterior furrows communicate directly with the aperture. The canal is very wide at first, but tapers gradually to a tolerably fine groove, as the anterior spine, or canal- sheath is bent back almost in the form of a sickle. Relations and Distribution.—This species is of considerable interest as probably the oldest Malaptera known. The Collyweston Slate cannot well be higher than the middle part of the Murchisone-zone. Poor specimens are occasionally obtained from the neighbouring Lincolnshire Limestone, but the species has probably not been found out of the Stamford district. It is by no means uncommon at Colly- weston. 21. Mataprera BENTLEYI, M. and L., var. NecuEoTA. Plate III, fig. 2. Cf. Morris and Lycett, Great-Ool. Moll., pl. ii, fig. 16. This differs from the more usual form, (1) in being smaller, (2) the whorls of the spire being rather more angular and the ornamentation finer ; (3) the posterior digitation more recurved upon the spire; (4) the anterior digitations scarcely perceptible. Genus—Sprinicgera, D’ Orbigny, 1850. “These are Rostellarias compressed and with successive lateral varices, like Ranella, but which have at each varix a long point.” ‘Prod.,’ vol. i, p.270. Htage Bajocien.’ Fischer (‘ Manuel,’ p. 677) regards Spinigera as merely a subgenus of Alaria. He gives the following diagnosis. ‘ Shell elongate, narrow, fusiform ; anterior canal long, straight ; varices continuous, alioned on one side or on both sides, as with Ranella, and provided with a long spine directed transversely.” The com- pression of the shell, originally diagnosed by D’Orbigny, seems to me also an important feature, and helps to distinguish Spinigera, which represents a curious section of the Aporrhaide, placed at the opposite extremity of the scale to that of Malaptera and its allies. 1 N.B.—This figure and fig. 1¢ were drawn from reversed casts in gutta-percha. SPINIGERA. * 103 This genus is limited both vertically and horizontally. In England it is almost exclusively confined to the Inferior Oolite of Dorsetshire, with a stray specimen from Dundry. In France the type species, Spinigera longispina, Desl., is not uncommon in the beds of Bayeux. In the singular repetition of the Bayeux-beds on a Callovian horizon, which occurs at Montreuil-Bellay, two species of Spinigera are found, according to the determinations of MM. Hébert and Deslongchamps. The Bathonian beds in France have not yielded any, and this is also the case as regards our own Great Oolite. The Dorsetshire beds of Inferior-Oolite age, and especially those of Bradford Abbas, provide us with some interesting forms. Five species may be noted, of which three are probably new. Like Alaria some are monodactyl, as Sp. recurva, where the last lateral spine appears to have the function of a wing-digitation ; others, like Sp. didactyla, have two wing-digitations when adult. The spines are in many cases seen to be hollow in section, showing that they were chan- nelled or perforated. | Owing to the compression, which appears characteristic of the genus, it would be useless to attempt any comparison by means of the spiral angle. In all cases the shell is more or less elongate, fusiform, and compressed. 22. SPINIGHRA TRINITATIS, Tawney, 1873. Plate III, figs. 3 a, b; 3 ¢, d, e. 1873. ALARIA TRINITATIS, Tawney. Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 12, pl. i, fig. 6. Cf. also RosteLnarta spinosa, Minster. Goldfuss, iii, p. 15, pl. 170, fig. 2. Bibliography, &c.—Mr. Tawney, in describing his species, admitted that the materials were very imperfect ; and this we can easily believe, since it would be difficult to conjecture from the figure given in the ‘ Dundry Gasteropoda,’ that the Specimen was a Spinigera. However, there was enough to distinguish it from « Alaria”’ longispina, Desl. Sp. trinitatis is probably closely related to Rostellaria spinosa, Minster. At any rate the species from the Jura-kalk of Pappenheim is evidently a Spinigera, and resembles this species rather than Sp. longispina, Desl. Description : Length’ . : : » 8 mm: Ratio of minor to major axis of width « oo 2 LOO: Shell elongate, fusiform. Whorls of spire extremely flattened, body-whorl less so; apical whorls smooth and tumid; next whorl has a median costated keel 1 Tn all cases the canal is excluded. 104. GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. (fig. 3 b); then comes a whorl with a keel nearly median and finely crenulated ; each of these whorls presents a fine basal rim just above the suture. The four or five remaining whorls, including the body-whorl, have the keel almost at the anterior extremity; traces of the fine crenulation are seen on the keels of the two higher whorls, but this is almost obliterated on the penultimate and body-whorl. In the four or five last whorls there are two fine spiral lines above the keel, and one below ; these are decussated by numerous fine radial lines, often indistinct. The four or five last whorls also develop a continuous chain of bilateral varices (fig. 3 e), each of which sends out a spine on crossing the keel (not always visible). Aperture subovate, elongate; canal very long and straight. Without wing, except so far as the antero-lateral spine, originating in the varix, and not in the outer lip, represents one. Relations and Distribution.—This species is extremely variable, especially as to the position of the keel in the anterior whorls. Occasionally the body-whorl is more angular, and in such cases specimens are not always to be distinguished from Sp. didactyla. Indeed, it is possible that Sp. trinitatis represents an incomplete stage of that very bizarre form. Somewhat rare in the Sowerbyi-bed of Bradford Abbas, and quoted also from Dundry. 23. SPINIGERA LONGISPINA, Deslongchamps, 1842. Plate ILI, figs. 4a, 46, 4c. 1842. RaneLLA Lonaispina, Desl. Mém. Soc. Linn. Norm., vol. vii, p. 152, pl. xi, fig. 29. Bibliography.—This being the type of the genus, most forms of Spinigera hitherto found in the British Oolites have been thus referred to by collectors. Deslongchamps’ species is, however, in reality almost unknown in our collections, and unless great pains be taken to show the spines it has so much the appearance of an Alaria that few would suspect its real nature. Description : Length : ; : . domm, Ratio of minor to major axis of width .. > OO 100 Shell elongate, fusiform. Whorls subventricose and only slightly compressed. Apical whorls subglobular ; next succeeds an intermediate whorl, subangular, with a median keel, and traces of axial costz anteriorly ; the remaining six whorls, including the body-whorl, have the keel less and less median until its position is at about the lower third. The ornaments consist of numerous spiral lines, which have moderately wide interspaces, and are carried over the bilateral varices in undu- SPINIGERA. 105 lations. At the junction with each keel and the varices a spine is developed and generally nearly at right angles to the axis of the shell, sometimes with a slight anterior deflection. These spines are always situated about two-thirds down the whorl; above the base of each spine is a slight corrugation of the varix but no more than one spine on each side of the whorl. Aperture ovate-oblong to subquadrate; no regular wing, since the anterior lateral spine springs from the varix and not from the outer lip; canal long and straight. N.B.—There seems a certain amount of irregularity in the development of the spines, but on the whole the arrangement is distinctly bilateral, though in some cases the spines appear better developed on one side than on the other. Relations and Distribution—Nearly related to the succeeding species, Sp. longispina is in this country eminently characteristic of the Humphriesianus-zone, where alone I have succeeded in finding it. The three figured specimens are all from the Sherborne district. The Sauzei-bed at Oborne contains a very inflated variety. Mr. Wilson has lately found a specimen in the iron-shot Oolite of Dundry, which seems to present features intermediate between this species and those of the one next described, though inclining towards Sp. longispina. 24, SPINIGERA RECURVA, sp. nov. Plate ITI, figs.5a,56; 5c, d,e; 5f, 9, h. Description : Length (full size) : . 22mm Ratio of minor to major axis of width : - 402100 Shell rather short, fusiform, and moderately compressed. Apical whorls four, subglobular and plain (fig. 5 h), constituting the opening of a very convex spiral angle; next whorl angular and costated longitudinally; the succeeding whorls of the spire (three or four) have either no longitudinals or at best very faint ones, but are spirally ornamented throughout, and betray a tendency to bicarination which varies in different specimens but is generally well marked. The body-whorl exhibits a third carina, sometimes also visible in the penultimate. The chain of bilateral varices is more or less continuous, but a spine is always sent out on both sides where the varix crosses the lower keel (fig. 5 e). The direction of the spines is irregular, those on the body-whorl have mostly a tendency to curve upwards. Aperture very nearly quadrate and graduating into a wide and straight canal. There is no actual wing, but in the well-preserved specimen, fig. 5 a, the spines are seen to be grooved, and the groove in the anterior lateral spine is seen distinctly to communicate through a notch in the outer lip with the aperture, hence it may also be said to have the function of a wing. 14 106 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. Relations and Distribution.—Distinguished from Sp. longispina in being much shorter, although with nearly the same number of whorls ; also in the marked bicari- nation of the anterior whorls, and to a certain extent in the direction taken by the spines, some of which have a tendency to curve upwards. It is also more compressed and the whorls less tumid. Spinigera compressa, D’Orb. (Héb. and Desl., p. 18, pl. vi, fig. 8), from the Callovian of Montreuil-Bellay, which species is regarded by the authors as synonymous with Muricida fragilissima, Quenstedt (‘ Der Jura,’ tab. 65, fig. 30), is a small form rather nearer to Sp. longispina than to this species. Spinigera recurva is essentially a fossil of the lower part of the Parkinsoni-zone of South Dorset (P,), being far from uncommon in the cliffs of Burton Bradstock and Bridport Harbour, likewise in the quarries of the interior, especially at Vitney Cross. I have also a stunted variety from Broadwinsor, showing more ornamenta- tion than usual in the subapical whorls. The species has been recognised by M. Deslongchamps in the Bajocian of Normandy as one hitherto unnamed. Undoubtedly the differences which separate it from Sp. longispina are not very great, and some might be disposed to regard it asa variety. At the same time these differences are constant or nearly so, and are coincident with a change of horizon. When we feel sure that such is the case it seems only reasonable to “make a new species.”’ 25. SPINIGERA DIDACTYLA, sp. nov. Plate III, figs. 6 a, 6b,6c; 6d, e, f, 9. Description.—This is a very variable shell, especially as to size and angular measurements; or, stated in other terms, several forms presenting considerable differences of size and outline are grouped under one specific distinction. The dimensions, therefore, must be given subsequently under the heading “ varieties.” Shell elongate to sub-elongate, fusiform, and greatly compressed. Apex very blunt. The three apical whorls smooth and tumid; the whorls immediately succeeding have a median costated keel; the two costated whorls show a basal rim above the suture. The rest of the shell, consisting usually of five whorls in the longer varieties, and of four whorls in the shorter varieties, is nearly plain, or pro- vided only with fine spiral lines. The keel is well developed, and ranges from submedian to anterior in position. These whorls develop the bilateral varices, which send out short spines on crossing the keel. The body-whorl is strongly bicarinate, sending out from each keel two long channelled bifurcating spines, which greatly resemble the double wing of the didactyl Alarias. The aperture is subquadrate or trapezoidal, with the outer lip distended over SPINIGERA. 107 the wing and in communication with the channelled digitations. Canal long and straight, but no complete termination has been seen. Varieties and Dimensions.—In the longer varieties, which constitute a consider- able majority, the degree of compression, or ratio of minor to major axes of width, which might be called the index of compression, is as 57 to 100. In the shorter and wider varieties it is about as 50 to 100, 7. e. one side of the shell is twice as wide as the other. From 15 to 20 mm. in length seems to be about an average for the narrower varieties. The large specimen (fig. 6 a) measures upwards of 30 mm., but this must be regarded as a megalomorph. ‘The length in this case is gained not by an additional number of whorls, but by the greater height of each. In the wide variety (fig. 6d, and enlargements) the apical whorls resolve themselves into an almost undistinguishable nucleus, the two costated whorls are in their place, and the remainder of the shell appears in all cases to consist of four instead of five whorls. Hence this variety seems to have arrived at maturity earlier. The length of this variety may be taken at from 12 to 13 mm. Relations and Distribution.—This curious species helps to show the analogy which exists between Alarta and Spinigera. Unless we are prepared to believe that Sp. trinitatis is a young or undeveloped form of Sp. didactyla, the latter stands almost alone. If Spinigera trinitatis be an undeveloped form, then the two species, though related, might be regarded as distinct. But if Sp. trinitatis be merely the young stage of the other, then it is clear that they only form one species. The point is a difficult one and not easy to decide. There is a considerable degree of resemblance in the more apical portions of the spire. On the whole the anterior whorls, which make up the bulk of the shell, are less angular in Sp. trinitatis, and show more spiral ornamentation. Both forms are mainly confined to the Sowerbyi-bed at Bradford Abbas, and in my own collection Sp. didactyla is the most numerous. These species are appa- rently not known to occur in the Inferior Oolite of Normandy. 26. SPINIGERA ORASSA, Sp. nov. Plate III, fig. 7. Description . Length about : : : . 25 mm. Shell subelongate, fusiform. Apex unknown. Whorls stout and subangular (seven remain), with a strong keel placed towards the anterior extremity. No spiral ornament visible, but the whorls are rugose with axial lines, most pro- bably of growth. The bilateral varices in the only available specimen are not well seen, and the spines are more or less broken off. Body-whorl sub-bicarinate, 108 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. with a stout diverging pair of spines, or didactyl wing. Other indications are wanting. Relations and Distribution.—This species seems to be the descendant of the short variety of Sp. didactyla. A single specimen was found in the Sauzei-bed, or marl with green grains at Oborne. Genus—Ataria, Morris and Lycett, June, 1851. “* Shell fusiform, turrited ; anterior canal straight or curved ; lip dilated, digitate or palmate, formed by the prolongation of the last whorl; no posterior canal; no sinus properly so-called on the anterior margin of the lip; columellar margin not callous.” —FIscuER. The above diagnosis is substantially that of Piette (‘ Cont. de la Pal. Franc.,’ p- 16), who adopted Morris and Lycett’s genus with modification. Piette further alludes to the nakedness of the first whorls, which are smooth and convex, and also to the power of developing varices, spurs, and protuberances at various periods of increase, evident traces of rudimentary wings, which appeared usually on the side opposite the actual (definitive) wing. This very important genus has been variously subdivided into sections, to say nothing of sub-genera, such as Spinigera previously described. On the other hand, as already observed, there are not wanting those who fail to see any generic difference between Alaria and Aporrhais (Chenopus). Into these questions I do not feel disposed fully to enter, being on the whole satisfied that the genus Alaria may fairly be taken to cover the remainder of the wing-shells of the Inferior Oolite, with possibly one or two exceptions. It would not be difficult for a casuist to prove, almost to demonstration, that the family of the Aporrhaide consists of little more than one genus. Thus Cossmann makes Malaptera (in part the old Jurassic Pterocera) co-generic with Aporrhais, which Gardner says does not differ from Alaria, of which Spinigera, according to Fischer, is merely a sub-genus. As was urged in the Introduction to this memoir, since the practical acceptance of the doctrine of evolution we no longer worship the fetish implied in such terms as “species,” ‘‘ genus,” ‘family,’ &c. If no lawyer is able to draft an Act of Parliament through which some other lawyer cannot drive a coach-and-four, how much more applicable is this principle to the diagnosis of shells. As far as the shell goes we need not, I think, have much difficulty in separating Alaria from Aporrhais in the majority of cases, since the wing in Alaria is barely or, at best, but scantily palmate, and does not envelope more of the spire than the anterior half of the penultimate. The monodactyl Alarie are widely different from ALARIA. 109 Aporrhais, and, if we except certain obscure forms with no wing attached, the monodactyls seem to have been the earliest Aporrhaids. Hven the didactyl Alarie have the wing but scantily palmate, and not embracing. In the Great Oolite, however, there are forms such as ‘‘ Pterocera”’ atractoides, Desl., where the wing becomes more complex and embracing; and here the resemblance to Aporrhais becomes effective. Hence Piette places this species under Aporrhais. When we come to the malacology of the subject, attempts at comparison resolve themselves mainly into conjecture, as far as the Jurassic Aporrhaids are concerned. These may have been the ancestors of part of the Strombide as well as of the modern Aporrhaide, and probably differed from both to a certain extent. Piette divided the Jurassic Alariew into five sections, viz. Varicifers, the Monodactyls, the Adactyls, the Longicaudes, and the Hamicaudes. To simplify matters these might be placed under two grand divisions. We do not, in this country, appear to have the section ‘‘ Varicifer ’’ developed, as far as I can understand it ; the Monodactyls proper are numerous and important, whilst the Adactyls may owe their wingless appearance to various causes. All these I propose to place under the first grand division, assuming that they either have, or might have, no more than one digita- tion when there is no evidence of a second. Our first grand division, then, is constituted by the Monodactyls. The Longicaudes, which are almost coextensive with the mywrus-group, and the Hamicaudes, which are almost coextensive with the trifida-group, make up the second grand division. The shells of both these groups, when mature, develop two digitations on the wing. These are Didactyls. ‘There will still remain one or two forms somewhat difficult to place. It is probably true that more species are made out of these fossils than would be the case if all the specimens could be obtained in a reasonably perfect condition, like the shells, for instance, of existing species of Aporrhais. But if we were to wait until none but perfect specimens of Alaria were accepted, the Jurassic Apor- rhaidz might as well be left alone. Owing to the number of processes which many of these curious shells possessed, their preservation is rarely complete, and it thus happens that what ought to be recognised as the same species presents such a different aspect under the various conditions under which it is found as to make its recognition very difficult. To avoid error altogether under the circumstances is almost impossible. ‘Too often we have to choose between the Scylla of a doubtful identification and the Charybdis of ‘‘ species-making.”’ Thus the first forms described and figured in Pl. IV are wingless, and mostly without the canal-sheath. It becomes necessary to distinguish these in some way, are little more than tentative. The bulk of the species are described with some attempt at grouping. 99 yet such “species 110 GASTEROPODA OF TH" INFERIOR OOLITE. Division I. Tur Monopacry.s. 27. ALARIA ARENOSA, Hudleston, 1884. Plate IV, fig. 1. 1884. AaRia aRENOSA, Hudl. Geol. Mag., dec. iii, vol. i, p. 198 (May), pl. vii, fig. 7. Description : Length’. : . 20 mm. Width of body-whorl i length of shell . ole 100) Approximate spiral angle : S20. Shell fusiform, turrited. Number of whorls aan ten, apical ones unknown. Hach whorl has a median carina which is strongly tuberculated. In the upper whorls this tuberculation is extended axially so as almost to reach from suture to suture; but in the last two whorls it is confined to the region of the keels. The whorls are marked with rather strong spiral lines. The body-whorl carries two keels ; the upper one is the strongest, and has tubercles very similar to those on the penult ; the tuberculations of the lower keel are less strong. The nature of the wing is uncertain, there being no outer lip preserved. Aperture ?; canal long and moderately curved. Relations and Distribution.—Some of the peculiarities of the figured specimen are partly due to matrix and condition of the fossil. Piette (op. cit., p. 23) alludes to a variety of Rostellaria subpunctata, Minst., figured by Terquem, which, as regards the tuberculations of the lower whorls, may have some resemblance. This was from the Opalinus-zone. From Al. Phillipsti this species differs in the position of the longitudinal costule, in the tuberculated keels of the body-whorl, and in the slightly narrower spiral angle. Rare in the Dogger Sands (Opalinus-zone) this species is interesting as the earliest example of Alaria at present known from the Jurassic beds of Yorkshire. 1 These measurements exclude the canal. Since all Alarie possess a more or less blunt apex, with great convexity of the opening of the spiral angle, the ‘approximate spiral angle” of this and subsequent measurements is intended to denote the mean angle of the spire without reference to the apical whorls. ALARIA. 111 28. ALARIA ANGUSTA, Sp. nov. Plate LV, fig. 2. Description : Length : : 22 mm. Width of body-whorl to length of shell = SOOO: Approximate spiral angle ; oo alae Shell fusiform, turrited. Apex blunt. Whorls about ten, prominent and deeply divided by the suture on the principal whorls of the spire ; the carina is very nearly median, and the slope of anterior and posterior moieties nearly equal. ‘The longi- tudinal costze are well developed, and especially prominent on the keels ; they extend almost from suture to suture, but are strongest anteriorly. The spirals are close, undulating, and distinct ; about seven fine ones in the posterior half of the whorls, and four or five stouter, and wider apart, below the keels. The last whorl is but slightly ventricose, and has ornaments nearly similar in character to those of the spire, except that the coste are reduced to tubercles on the keel, and that there is a faint trace of an anterior keel at the base. The canal-sheath is broken off short ; other indications wanting. Relations and Distribution.—Although the specimen from which the above description is taken seems never to have carried a wing, the indications are clearly those of an Alaria. The blunt apex, and nearly smooth apical whorls, afford additional evidence in this direction. We may regard it either as an immature shell, or as a species of Alaria which had not developed a wing (Adactyl). In many cases the absence of a wing is due to mutilation, but hardly so in this. From the whole of the hamus-group it is separated by the ornamented character of the body-whorl, and by considerable differences in the ornaments of the spire and other features. It comes pretty near in many respects to Alaria arenosa. The specimen is unique, and forms part of the Jnferior-Oolite collection in the Bristol Museum. I have no note as to the horizon or locality. Itis a well preserved spathic fossil in a fawn-coloured limestone, which is not iron-shot. 29. Ataria? sp. nov. Plate IV, fig. 3. There is hardly enough of this fossil remaining to determine its true character. The whorls are very tumid and without much keel. The spiral ornaments are numerous and well cut; the longitudinal coste are very thick and wide apart, and extend almost from suture to suture. The spiral angle appears to be rather wide. 112 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. The last whorl is somewhat inflated, and similarly ornamented. There are indications that possibly another whorl may have been broken off. In the paucity and thickness of its longitudinals, this form bears some resem- blance to Al. rarispina, Schlumb. In order to avoid a mistaken identification I would suggest the name CRAssICOsTATA as provisional. A single specimen in the Dogger. 30. ALARIA? sp. nov. Plate IV, fig. 4. The spiral angle is about 30°, the length of the specimen about 20 mm., and the number of whorls ten. The whorls of the spire are short and strongly turrited. The sculpture is rich, the longitudinals being numerous and stout, but somewhat irregular ; they are mainly confined to the lower part of the whorls, and are extremely nodular at the junctions with the spirals. There is no very salient keel, but the anterior portion of each whorlis marked by three coarse spirals, the upper- most of which serves as a keel, and above this are from three to four fine wavy spirals. The body-whorl is similarly ornamented, but shows rather more irregu- larity. It shows no sudden increase. Since the specimen is unique and imperfect as regards the aperture, but little can be said by way of comparison. The rich and nodular character of the sculpture seems to separate it from all forms of the hamus-group, and, supposing the shell to be complete in that case the body-whorl is totally different. It was found in the shell-bed of Horton Hill corresponding to the Upper Trigonia-grit (base of Parkinsoni-zone), and may be known temporarily as Au. Hortonensis. The Hamus-Group. A very considerable portion of the more strongly turrited and costate Alarie belong to this important group, which is eminently characteristic of the Monodacty] section. They occur principally in the Upper Division of the Inferior Oolite, at least in the South of England. The forms which most nearly resemble the typical specimens of the Bayeux-beds are to be found chiefly in the Parkinsoni-zone of South Dorset, but micromorphs and varieties, such as Al. Phillipsii, oceur in many parts of the Inferior Oolite. Also there are doubtful fossils such as Al. “* spinulosa,”’ which may be immature individuals of Al. Phillipsii, or, more probably, of Al. unicarinata. ALARIA. 113 31. Auaria. Variety, or immature form. Plate IV, figs. 5 a, 5 b. 1884. ALaRiIa PHILLIPSII, spinulose variety. Hudleston in Geol. Mag., dec. in, vol. i, p. 149, pl. vi, fig. 5. Length from 18—25 mm., spiral angle rather over 30°, number of whorls nine. The apex, as is the case with nearly all Alarie, consists of two and a half smooth, rather tumid whorls, but the apical angle as distinct from the spiral angle is only slightly convex. The remaining whorls of the spire are tumid and moderately angular. The longitudinal coste, at first extending almost from suture to suture, become much shorter on the penultimate and last whorl, where they present tae appearance of spinulose nodes. The spirals of the posterior area in each whorl are fine and numerous ; the primary spirals on the anterior area are four, the uppermost one serving as keel. The body-whorl is moderately bicarinate, but the anterior carina probably dies out. The wing is formed on the posterior carina, but no prolonged digitation has been noted. Aperture wide and triangular; canal straight, as far as known. Originally it was considered that this form might be a variety of Al. Phillipsii ; but, if it be not a distinct species, | am disposed to consider that it may be an immature form of Al. wnicarinata. In order to avoid mistakes it may be distin- guished for the present as AL. sprNuLosa. Rare in the Dogger of Blue Wyke. 32. ALARIA HAMUS, Deslongchamps, 1842. Plate LV, figs. 6 a, 6 b, 6¢, 6d; Plate VII, fig. 9. 1842. RostTeLLaria HAamus, Desl. Mém. Soc. Linn. Norm., vol. vii, p. 173, pl. ix, figs. 32—36. 1850. PrErocera Hamus, D’Orbigny. Prod., i, p. 270. 1864. ALaria HaMuS, Hud. Desl. Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Frang., p. 39, pl. v, figs. 1—11, &c., including several varieties. Non Avaria Hamus, Desl. In Morris and Lycett, Great-Ool. Moll., p. 16, pl. iil, figs. 2, 2a, 26. Bibliography, Sc.—The identity of the Normandy fossil with the “ Rostellaria composita”’ figured by Phillips (subsequently the Pterocera Phillipsii of the Prodrome) was evidently suspected by Deslongchamps. That author describes Al. hamus as a common fossil of the ‘‘ Oolithe ferrugineuse.” Only one example was known to him from the Great Oolite. The fact of its rarity in the Great 15 114 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. Oolite is endorsed by Piette and Cossmann. The former figures a variety (op. cit. pl. v, figs. 6 and 7) from the Fuller’s Earth of Les Clappes, which is charac- terised by numerous slender longitudinals on each whorl. The same author (op. cit., p. 46) points out the difference between Al. hamus, Desl., and the fossil so identified by Morris and Lycett. Description : Length of good-sized specimens . 25 mm. Width of body-whorl to length of shell. . 40:100 Approximate spiral angle : capone Shell strongly turrited (muricated), fusiform ; apex blunt, but the apical angle only slightly convex, so that the general aspect of the spire is sharp. Number of whorls eleven; two and a half smooth and convex; remainder of whorls of spire very angular, the keel being slightly above the middle; longitudinal coste strong, regular, and numerous, for the most part sloping from right to left. In the majority of specimens from Burton Bradstock these coste are confined to the anterior area of the whorl and fail to reach the suture, but in some cases (fig. 6 a) they extend across the keel. There are about five spirals above the keel and usually four below, exclusive of the keel. The body-whorl is bicarinate, with the keels plain, and the spiral ornamentation fainter in most cases; the posterior keel carries two spinous lumps, one situate half a turn above the wing and the other mid-way between these points. The aperture is triangular to trapezoidal. The wing is constituted by the continuation of the posterior or principal keel, and consists of one stout digitation proceeding for some distance at right angles to the axis of the shell and suddenly curving upwards, somewhat after the fashion of a hook (the sharpness of this curve not sufficiently shown in fig. 6c); see also Plate VII, fig. 9. The wing scarcely overlaps the base of the penultimate. The delicate spiral ornamentation is continued on the wing, base, and canal-sheath, being faintly decussated by fine longitudinal lines. Canal broad, moderately long, and curved anteriorly, though not to any great degree. Relations and Distribution—As the type of the Monodactyls Alaria hamus constitutes a standard of comparison both for varieties and species. The Dorset- shire specimens most nearly approach Deslongchamps’ fig. 32. In the Normandy specimens which I have seen the wing appears to overlap the base of the penulti- mate somewhat more than in our English examples, and possibly the hook-like curve at the termination of the digitation is sharper, and the digitation itself shorter in the Normandy specimens. The individual figured (Pl. VII, fig. 9) is an unusually fine example. This species is most abundant in the Parkinsoni-zone of South Dorset, and especially at Burton Bradstock, whence nearly all our best specimens are obtained ALARIA, 115 —mostly from P, (page 31). Specimens showing any of the processes (6 ¢, 6 d) are rare. The specimen 6 d differs somewhat from all the others, and approaches the var. Phillipsvi in some respects, and still more reminds me of the form provi- sionally described as Al. spinulosa. I think that Al. hamus, as defined above, is mainly confined to the upper division of the Inferior Oolite, at any rate in Dorset- shire. Hlsewhere in England, except perhaps at Dundry, it appears to be represented either by the variety Phillipsi, or else by dwarf forms, like those to which I now direct attention. 33. DWARF VARIETIES OF ALARIA HAMus. Plate IV, figs. 7 a, 7 b, 7 ¢. Specimens from the Parkinsoni-zone of Notgrove (fig. 7 a) and from the Parkin- soni-zone of Horton Hill (Upper Trigonia-grit) are fairly similar. The dwarfing extends to all the whorls, the whole shell is proportionally smaller, and the large spirals on the anterior portions of the whorls are always three in number. The keel of the body-whorl possesses the spinous lumps characteristic of Al. hamus, but they are better shown in specimens from Horton Hill than in the more slender ones from Notgrove, which might indeed be regarded with equal justice as dwarfs of the variety Phillipsw. The specimen from Horton Hill (fig. 7 6) is sufficiently well preserved to show that it was possessed of a wing and “ tail”’ in all respects, except as to size, identical with Al. hamus. The evidence of a wing in the case of the Notgrove specimens is less clear, but the plain and strongly-keeled body-whorls show that the specimens are mature shells. The specimen (fig 7 a) from the Gryphite-grit of the neighbourhood of Stroud presents other differences. The shellis shorter in proportion to its width, and seems to have matured earlier; the whorls are strongly muricated. In this speci- men the three spirals which occupy the anterior portion of the whorls of the spire are so conspicuous that, if a trivial name be required, I would suggest that of TRICINCTA. The specimen (fig. 11), also from the Gryphite-grit, is most probably an imma- ture form of Al. Phillipsii. Such forms are not uncommon in the Scarborough Limestone, and these of course are referred to Al. Phillipsii im default of better evidence. It should be noted that, while the full-grown and typical forms of Al. hamus occur in the Dorset district, these dwarfed varieties seem to take its place in the Cotteswolds. 116 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. 34. AtaRtiA HAUS, Desl., var. Puituipsi1, D’Orbigny, 1850. Plate IV, figs. 8 a, eG 1829. Rosrerraria composira, Sow. Phillips, G. Y., pp. 124, 129, 165, pl. ix, fig. 28. 1850. Prerocera Pariurpst, D’Orbigny. Prod., i, p. 270. 1853. Anarta Puriuipsi, D’Orb. Morris and Lycett, Great-Ool. Moll., p. 111, pl. xv, figs. 15, 15 a. 1854. — — — Morris, Catalogue, p. 234. 1867. — — D’ Orb = Au. HaMUs, Desl. Laube, Gast. von Balin, p. 23. 1884. — uHamus, Desl., var. Putuutpsi1, D’Orb. Hudleston, Geol. Mag., dec. i, vol. i, p. 145, pl. vi, figs. 3 and 4. Bibliography, &c.—It is noticeable that Morris regarded Al. hamus as a species of the Great Oolite only, and Al. Phillipsii as a species confined to the Inferior Oolite in England (Scarborough Limestone, &.). It has already been shown that Morris and Lycett were incorrect in their identification of Deslongchamps’ species, which can scarcely be said to occur in the Great Oolite in England. But it is evident that Morris, judging from the localities quoted in his ‘‘ Catalogue,” regarded Al. Phillipsii and the true Al. hamus as the same species. Laube takes the same view, but gives no figure. If we could obtain perfect specimens of each, the point might be settled. Up to the present time I have never seen a Yorkshire specimen with the wing-digita- tion preserved. In fact I have never seen from any locality in England a specimen of the variety Phillips with the digitation. Lately an unusually good specimen (fig. 8 a) was obtained from the Scarborough Limestone. Description.—The points in which this differs from the Dorsetshire Al. hamus are that the spire is more slender, the costulee are smaller, and the whorls are less boldly muricated ; the aperture is subtriangular as in Al. hamus, and I think there are traces of the spinous swellings on the upper keel of the body-whorl. Imperfect specimens from the Dogger (fig. 8 b) and from the Millipore-bed (fig. 8 c) seem to bear out this view. Relations and Distribution.—But little more need be said about the relations of this very doubtful species or variety. Most specimens of Alaria from the Inferior Oolite, which possess a moderately thin spire with longitudinal costule arranged in a circlet anteriorly on the whorls, and a plain bicarinate body-whorl are likely to be thus referred. The type is a very general one throughout the Oolites, and ALARIA. Ly is well exemplified in “‘ Rostellaria”’ composita, Sow., a lower Oxfordian fossil, Alaria seminuda, Héb. and Desl., and probably others. 35. Ataria HaMuS, Desl., var. Noposa. Plate IV, fig. 9. A single specimen, said to come from Stoford, in the Buckman Collection, presents some curious analogies with, and yet some marked differences from, A/. hamus. It is a stouter and larger shell than the average of South-Dorset specimens. Number of whorls ten to eleven; not only are the apical whorls smooth and without ornament, but this peculiarity extends to the subapical whorls, so that the turrited character characteristic of the hamus-group is not developed until much later. The longitudinals are extremely thick and nodose. The wing overlaps the lower half of the penultimate, a feature not preserved in the Burton Bradstock specimens ; there seems also to have been an anterior spine on the keel of the body-whorl instead of a mere spinous swelling. 36. ALARIA PINGUIS, sp. nov. Plate IV, fig. 10; and Plate VII. fig. 11. Description.—Since the available specimens are probably incomplete, dimensions cannot be given, but the spiral angle is about 45°. Spire wide-angled and conoidal, and consisting of eight whorls; the apical whorls, as usual, plain; subapical whorls convex and either plain or spirally striated; the anterior whorls possess coarse longitudinal tuberculation in addition to the spiral ornaments. Body-whorl bicarinate, keels plain or nearly so. Relations and Distribution—Through the var nodosa there seems to be some connection between these shells and the regular Al. hamus. Yet, omitting that possible intermediary, the differences are so great as to warrant a somewhat stronger distinction. Since none of the processes are known, the species must be regarded as tentative and incomplete. Rare in the Parkinsoni-zone of Dorset. The specimen, Pl. IV, fig. 10, is from Stoford, horizon unknown; the specimen, Pl. VII, fig. 11, is from P,, Vitney Cross. 118 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. 37. Anarta: Cf. Rarispina, Schlumberger, 1864. Plate IV, fig. 12. 1864, Ataria RARISPINA, Schlumberger. Bull. Soc. Linn. Norm., vol. ix, p. 225, pl. vi, figs. 7—9. 1867. — — — Piette, Continuat. Pal. Frang., p. 100, pl. xx, figs. 1-3. This specimen sufficiently resembles the description given by Piette to warrant itscomparison. The spire hasan angle of about 26°; whorls angular, keel about one third distant from the posterior suture ; coste very wide apart, but extending almost from suture to suture; spirals fine and wavy. Part of the penultimate is devoid of coste. Body-whorl scarcely bicarinate, and showing traces of a varix or spine on the keel. Piette observes that Schlumberger’s shell is very distinct from all other hami- form species ; it was described from a single specimen in the Sowerbyi-Murchisone- zone of the Meurthe. The specimen here figured is probably from the Sowerbyi-bed in Dorsetshire. It is certainly a more angular shell than the one figured by Piette, which, as regards the spire only, has more resemblance to the form (PI. IV, 3) provisionally named “ crassicostata.”’ A specimen lately acquired for the York Museum, in a similar matrix, shows that the wing-digitation is more produced and less sharply curved than in Al. hamus. Rare. The following species, viz. Al. wnicarinata, Al. unicornis, and Al. wnicornis, var., constitute a subgroup related to Al. hamus, but distinguished in possessing a some- what different digitation, in the effete character of the anterior keels on the body- whorl, and especially in the possession of powerful curved spines on the keel instead of mere spinous protuberances. They belong also, as it seems to me, to a lower horizon. It may be, indeed, that these are only varieties of one species. 38, ALARIA uNTOARINATA, Hudleston, 1884. Plate IV, figs. 13 a, 13 b, 18 ¢. 1884. ALARA uNIcaRINATA, Hudl. Geol. Mag., dec. iii, vol. i, p. 149, pl. vi, figs. 1, 2, 2a. Bibliography, §c.—Two specimens of Alaria, one in the York Museum, the other in the British Museum, seemed to me sufficiently distinct from Al. Phillipsw, as recognised by Morris and Lycett, to warrant distinction. Since then I have ascertained that this is the more usual form in the Dogger. It is just possible ALARIA. 119 that Phillips’ figure may have been meant for this one; for, although figured in the plate showing the Scarborough-Limestone fossils it has somewhat the look of a Dogger specimen. Description : Length ; . 26mm. Width of body-whorl i length of shell . 2 58 LOO Approximate spiral angle : 2 od? The spire is mainly on the type of Alaria lies but there is considerable variation in the several specimens; the whorls are more angular in some (fig. 13 a, fig. 13 c), more rounded in others (fig. 13 b) ; the position of the keel in the whorls of the spire also varies, being central in figs. 13 a and 13 d, and situate in the posterior third in fig. 13 c. The longitudinal costz likewise show considerable difference. Part of this apparent difference is due to mal-preservation (fig. 13 a). The body-whorl is without coste, and the anterior keel is so much aborted that the species is practically unicarinate. The keel gives birth to a very large spine a quarter of a turn above the base of the wing, and to another spine a quarter of a turn farther back, the latter being exactly opposite the wing. The aperture is triangular, the wing being pretty full for a Monodactyl, and terminating in a stout digitation, the exact nature of which has not been ascer- tained. Canal straight at first, but the exact termination unknown. Relations and Distribution.—The affinities of Al. wnicarinata have already been partially indicated ; when mere fragments of the spire alone are preserved, as is too often the case, it cannot well be distinguished from the mass of costated and turrited Alarie. Not uncommon in the Yorkshire Dogger ; it probably occurs in the Duston ironstone. N.B.—It should be observed that fig. 13 a is not a back view, but just midway between a back view and a front view. The fracture on the keel represents the posterior spine broken off ; the anterior spine is seen on the left. 39. ALARIA UNICoRNIS, Lycett, 1853. Plate V, fig. 1. 1853. RosTELLARIA UNICORNIS, Lycett. Proc. Cotteswold Nat. Field Club, vol. i, p- 80. Description.—* Spire lengthened, composed of many whorls; whorls cos- tated, the coste terminating in knobs on their upper portions; coste ten in a volution, indented by five encircling striz, last whorl smooth with a single prominent carina, having an acute and elevated spine about a quarter the circumference poste- riorly from the outer lip; the wing single, rounded, curved, slender, and produced ; caudal extremity moderately long.”—Lycerv. 120 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. The specimen figured has a length of 26 mm. (exclusive of the fragment of the canal-sheath), and a spiral angle of about 30°. Relations and Distribution.—It is only piecemeal, as it were, that we can hope to work out the true relations of the Jurassic Alariw. Available specimens are generally wanting in some feature of importance. In the present case, if we were sure that Al. uwnicornis possessed a second spine, opposite the wing, this feature would serve still more closely to connect it with Al. wnicarinata, notwithstanding certain differences in the spire which are increased by difference of matrix. Again, we are not certain of the true character of the digitation of Al. uwnicarinata. Very rare in the Oolite-Mar] of the Cotteswolds. 40. Auarta: Of. tnicornis, Lycett. Plate V, figs. 7 a, 7 b. Description : Length : ; : ‘ . 26 mm. Width of body-whorl to height of shell ; - 42): 100: Spiral angle . : 5 Ls Shell turrited, fusiform, elongate. Number of whorls about ten, excluding the apicals ; the whorls of the spire are very angular, and the keel placed rather far back, so as to make the anterior area twice as long as the posterior area. This peculiarity is less strong on the penultimate than on the other whorls of the spire. The coste are regular, very straight, and rather strongly marked, though becoming less well-developed in the anterior whorls. The spirals are fine and crowded posteally, much coarser, about four in number, below the keel. The body-whorl is entirely without coste, though marked by longitudinal striz. It is practically unicarinate, since the lower keel becomes effete before reaching the margin. The keel is very salient and carries two large spines :—a, the anterior spine, a quarter of a turn above the wing; p, the posterior spine, a quarter of a turn higher up, 7. e. opposite the wing. The aperture is rudely triangular, the wing consists of one digitation, which is stout at the base, but has not been observed further. Canal staight, as far as observed. These shells occur rarely towards the junction of the Sowerbyi-bed and the paving-stone bed at Bradford Abbas, and may be regarded as belonging to the Murchisong-zone. If a varietal name is required I would suggest that of Brap- FORDIENSIS. ALARIA. 121 41. AwartA FusoA, sp. nov. Plate V, fig. 3. Description : Approximate length . : . 26 mm. Width of body-whorl to length of Shell . . 48: 100. Spiral angle . ‘ | Oe Shell turrited, subelongate, apex lane Number of whorls about 10; the two apicals rounded and without ornament; whorls of the spire tumid and subangular, keel median and becoming very prominent in the anterior whorls. Longitudinal coste numerous, close, slightly curved, and extending nearly from suture to suture, being equally well-developed on the posterior as on the anterior area; spiral striz regular, numerous, and nearly uniform; sutures distinct and bordered by a slightly raised rim. Body-whorl without costz; posterior keel enormously developed, anterior keel barely perceptible. Wing single, with a deep and strong digitation, extending at right angles to the axis of the spire for about three-fourths the length of the spire, where it forms a very thick elbow, and then turns up in the shape of a short hook; the digitation is finely marked by lines in continuation of the spiral ornament of the shell. Other indications wanting. Relations and Distribution.—Differs from Al. hamus in the shape of the whorls, which are less mural, in the more median position of the keel, and in the fact that the coste extend nearly from suture to suture. In this species the posterior keel is more salient, and the anterior keel less developed. The length of the digitation and its great thickness at the elbow are also differences, so far as we can judge, from the few specimens which have these processes preserved. On the other hand, the shell is by no means wanting in a general resemblance to Al. Dundryensis, though unfortunately we are ignorant of the character of the wing in Mr. Tawney’s species. Alaria fusca is extremely rare in the Cadomensis-bed at Oborne (upper part of the Humphriesianus-zone). 42. Auarta. Species or variety. Plate V, fig. 4. There is hardly justification for burdening our lists with a fresh name in the present instance. This may possibly be the Dorsetshire representative of Al. Dundryensis, to which it bears considerable resemblance in the character of the 16 122 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. spire and its ornaments. The spire also has many points of resemblance to that of Al. fusca, but the digitation is more slender, and less abrupt in its upward curve. A single specimen from the Inferior Oolite of North Dorset, horizon and locality unknown. Asa mere name of convenience I would suggest that of AL. ALIENIGENA. 43. Ataria Dunpryensis, Tawney, 1873. Pl. V, fig. 2. Type refigured. 1873. Axaria Dunpryensis, Tawney. Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 12, pl. i, fig. 5. Description.—* Shell fusiform, elongate. Whorls seven to nine, angular; the keel not quite in the middle of the whorl, but inferior thereto; on the keel is a series of tubercles, probably twelve to fourteen on a whorl, which do not form costz in the [anterior] whorls, 7.e. the last, but are vertically compressed; the surface shows faint [longitudinal] lines; there are fine [spiral] lines, which are stronger near the suture.” —TAwney. Description : Length 5 ‘ . 30 mm. Width of body-whorl to heen of Shell. . 44: 100. Spiral angle . 1 BOK The type is one of those shells nerceds in etalline calcite, where the orna- mentation has probably undergone considerable modification, and this especially affects the length of the coste. The body-whorl is almost unicarinate and without cost; no spines are preserved, though there is good reason to suppose that a very prominent one existed a quarter of a turn above the wing. The base of the wing (which doubtless was monodactyl) is ornamented by fine cross-hatching, and it has a slight tendency to overlap the anterior portion of the penultimate. Other indications wanting. Relations and Distribution—The sub-median position of the keel, and its marked prominence, serve to separate this species from all members of the hamus- group; itis also much more unicarinate, and probably possessed a digitation of a very different character, which may have resembled that of Al. fusca, but which more probably resembled that of Al. Roubaleti, var. Dorsetensis, next to be described. The type-specimen is from the Inferior Oolite of Dundry, and is the only one known to me which presents any describable features. ALARIA. 123 44, Ataria Rousaeti, Schlumberger, 1864, var. Dorsrrensis. Plate V, figs. 5 a, 5b, 5c, 5d,5e,5f; and Plate VII, fig. 10. 1864. Ataria Rovusarert, Schlumberger. Bull. Soc. Linn. Norm., vol. ix, p. 2238, pl. vi, figs. 4—6. 1867. — — Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Frang., p. 102, pl. xx, figs. 4—8. Bibliography, &c.—The typical Alaria Roubaleti, Schlumb., is said to occur in the Department of the Meurthe (Lorraine), in a bed characterised by Am. Sowerbyt and Am. cycloides. The Dorsetshire fossil now under consideration is eminently characteristic of the so-called Sowerbyi-bed of Bradford Abbas, where it is rather abundant, and of course subject to considerable variety. In collections it is generally labelled Al. Dundryensis. Description : Length of large specimen . 32 mm. Width of body-whorl to height of shell . . 44: 100. Spiral angle . ; ; : | ge Shell turrited, fusiform, subconical; apex very blunt. Whorls about ten; apicals globose and smooth, succeeding whorls convex, and becoming angular owing to the development of a strong keel, whichis rather below the middle. The longitudinal costz of the earlier whorls of the spire are very numerous, curved, and extend from the posterior almost to the anterior suture. These coste disappear entirely on the posterior area of the ante-penultimate, and are only traceable as very faintly-cut serrations at wide intervals on the penultimate. The spiral lines are fine and very numerous; in the posterior areas they are closely set and of nearly equal strength ; anteriorly the spiral lmes are more irregular, so that a shallow sulcus is formed between each keel and the anterior suture. In immature specimens, which have not developed a wing (fig. 5 e), the last whorl is strongly bicarinate, but the next half-turn, which developes the wing, presents a body-whorl with the anterior keel greatly diminishing in importance as it approaches the margin. In mature specimens the body-whorl is full, entirely without longitudinal ornament, and only slightly bicarinate; the spiral lines are fine and very numerous, and slightly cross-hatched by radial lines of growth. The posterior keel carries two very powerful spinous processes (see basal views of figs. 5 a and 5 c); the anterior spine, a, is a quarter of a turn above the wing; the posterior spine, p, is a quarter of a turn farther back, and, consequently, opposite the wing ; both spines curve forwards. 124 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. The aperture (fig. 5 a) is widely triangular; the wing is constituted by the prolongation of the principal keel, and consists of one long and moderately stout digitation, which attains a length equal to the height of the spire before gradually curving backwards with a wide sweep towards its terminal point (see Pl. VII, fig. 10). Delicate lines, in continuation of the spirals, slightly cross-hatched by longi- tudinal lines, ornament the wing and digitation, and, in a less degree, the wing and canal-sheath. The canal is moderately wide, and extremely long, tapering gradu- ally to a point; it has a slight anterior curve. Relations and Distribution—It is probable that, in the presence of more perfect specimens of Al. Roubaleti and Al. Dundryensis, the differences which now seem to separate the var. Dorsetensis from both the other forms might be bridged over. At present we must be content to keep them apart, bearing in mind also that, in the type specimen of Al. Dundryensis, the processes of whatsoever nature, with the exception of the canal-sheath, are altogether wanting. Even granting that Al. Dundryensis was possessed of two spines on the keel, of which no mention is made in the diagnosis, there still remains a very considerable difference in the ornamen- tation of the spire, which is so very plain in the lower whorls of A/. Dorsetensis. On the other hand, the spire of Schlumberger’s species has a very great resem- blance to the Dorset fossil, but the latter differs in the development of two very important curving spines, which in Al. Roubaleti appear as mere spinous swellings. Moreover, we really know very little regarding the other processes of Al. Roubaleti. Owing to the comparative abundance of Al. Dorsetensis, it is possible, from one specimen or another, to obtain a tolerably complete notion of the original shell, which must be accepted as typical of the group to which it belongs. From the unicarinata-group, which shares with it the possession of two similar and similarly situated spines, it differs entirely in the character of the spire. From the hamus- group it differs, still more widely, in the length and slight curvature of the “ tail,” and also in the length and moderate curvature of the wing-digitation, as well as in the character of the spire (see Pl. VII, figs. 9 and 10, where the two forms are well contrasted). 45. AtaRiaA Rousateti, Schlumberger: another variety. Plate V, fig. 6. Spiral angle 26°. This form is at once distinguished from the numerous speci- mens of the far commoner Al. Dorsetensis by the comparative narrowness of the spiral angle and the greater delicacy of the ornamentation. A careful examination of the figured specimen renders it almost certain that it possessed the two spines characteristic of Al. Dorsetensis. ALARIA. 125 The aperture is triangular, and produced in a long and slender canal, somewhat more curved than in the preceding. In the figured specimen the callus of the inner lip extends to the upper keel. Rare in the concavus- or Sowerbyi-bed of Halfway House. If a temporary name is required, I would distinguish this form as ALARIA DIMIDIATA. 46. ALARIA psrtuDO-ARMATA, Hudleston, 1884. Plate V, fig. 8. 1884. ALARIA PSEUDO-ARMATA, Hudleston. Geol. Mag., dec. iii, vol. i, p. 150, pl. vi, figs. 6 and 6 a. Description : Length : : . 26 mm. Width of last whorl to length of Shell . « AS21100: Spiral angle 34°, Shell strongly turrited. Whorls sales ten ; ition aba the apicals are extremely angular, the dividing carina occurs about two-thirds down—a feature which is very marked in the penultimate. Hach whorl has about eight short, tuber- culated costule, which are straight and not developed in the anterior areas ; spiral ornaments uncertain, apparently irregular. Body-whorl is largely developed, very angular, and without coste. It carries a large median keel which supported one or two immense spines. Other indications wanting. Relations and Distribution—The peculiar character of the spire will serve to distinguish this species from any other Alaria in the Inferior Oolite. It evidently belongs to the section of unicarinate monodactyls, which carried powerful spines on the keel of the body-whorl. It may also have some relationship to Al. armata, M. and L., though that species is a difficult one to understand. Extremely rare in the Yorkshire Dogger. 47, Ataria Loruarineica, Schlumberger, 1864. Plate V, fig. 9. 1864. Axaria Lotuarinetca, Schlumb. Bull. Soc. Linn. Norm., vol. ix, p. 222, pl. vi, figs. 1—3. 1867. _ — _— Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Franc., p. 105, pl. xxi, 1873, —_~ — _ Tawney, Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 14. 126 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. Description : Probable length . - 40 mm. Width of last whorl to roar of shell = Zope QO: Spiral angle ‘ seeps Shell extremely elongate, ane turrited. “Whorls about ten (six visible in the figured specimen), convex, and scarcely angular, since the very slight keel or shoulder is close to the anterior suture. The longitudinals consist of regular and very straight ribs of considerable thickness, extending nearly from suture to suture ; these decussate with a system of rather prominent spirals, which are con- tinued in the base of the shell. The body-whorl shows a slight increase beyond the regular spiral angle, owing to the development of a strong median keel. Piette observes that this keel, which becomes spinous on the side opposite the wing, forms in its prolongation a thick digitation bent upon itself, wate twists towards the point of the spire. Relations and Distribution.—This is a Monodactyl of peculiar form, which seems almost to stand by itself, or at least to have no near relations, except perhaps in some degree to the species next described. Piette describes several varieties. It is said to be common in the zones of Am. Sowerbyi and Am. Murchisone, in the Department of the Meurthe. The Dundry specimen now figured, originally described by Tawney, is at present unique as a British example of this species. 48. ALARIA PRELONGA, sp.nov. Plate V, fig. 10. Description : Probable length . . 46 mm. Width of body-whorl to fener of shell 2 00s 100; Spiral angle : a wis Shell extremely elongate, farrited Whorls ten or eleven in number, and moderately angular, the keel being situate rather more than one-third the distance from the anterior suture. The longitudinals are mainly confined to the anterior area of the whorls, and consist of very straight stout costx, decussating with spirals which are more or less obliterated in the available specimens. In the penultimate the longitudinals fail entirely, the keel being plain and nearly median. There is a sharp rise of the keel in the body-whorl, which keel is also plain with indications of a spinous projection on the side opposite the outer lip ; the position of the keel is irregular. The aperture is triangular, and there is a considerable callous deposit on the columellar side. The indications of a wing and canal are not distinct. ALARIA. 127 Relations and Distribution.— Whether this curious species is a Monodactyl or an Adactyl cannot at present be decided. The condition of the available specimens is such as to lead to very grave suspicions. It is probably related to Al. Lotharingica. Very rare in the Murchisone-zone of Halfway House. We may fairly refer to these narrow-angled and elongate Alarias as the Lotharingica-group ; and with this group terminates Section I, or the Monodactyls in the wider acceptation of the term. Diviston II. Tar Dipaotyts. Srction 1.—Imperfectly Didactyl. 49. Atarta Dovusuisert, D’Orbigny. Plate V, fig. 11; Plate VI, figs la, 1b, le. 1850. Prerocera Dovsiiert, D’Orbigny. Prod. i, p. 270. 1866. ATARIA — — Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Franc., p. 54, pl. vi, fig. 1; pl. vii, fig. 1. Bibliography, §c.—D’Orbigny observes that this species is near to Pterocera (Chenopus) Philippi, K. and D., referred to by Piette as Alaria bicarinata. The type is said to have been derived from the Department of the Var. The specimens described and figured by Piette were so imperfect as to leave his determinations somewhat incomplete. But the semi-digitation, so to say, of the anterior portion of the wing, in addition to a considerable resemblance in the spire, helps to connect D’Orbigny’s species with certain specimens found in the Inferior Oolite of Dorset- shire, which can scarcely all be referred to one species. ‘I'hese, however, for the present may be treated as varieties. Var. A. (Plate VI, figs. 1a, 1b, 1c). Description.—Length of a full-grown specimen about 30 mm.; approximate spiral angle 36.° Shell conoidal, fusiform, apex of spire very blunt. Number of whorls about ten. The first five or six whorls’ are convex and nearly smooth, or only marked by fine spiral lines ; next succeeds a whor! with fine spiral lines and a faint submedian keel. The three remaining whorls of the spire, in addition to the fine spiral lines, develop a strong and rather blunt median keel, which at once 1 None of the available specimens of this variety exhibit the extreme apicals in such a condition as to afford the means for a thoroughly accurate description. 128 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. makes the whorls angular instead of convex (see Pl. VI, fig. 1 b, and enlargement, where the successive stages of growth are very well shown). In the penultimate and antepenultimate the anterior area is excavated, and exposes a rim above the suture, prefiguring, as it were, the anterior keel. The body-whorl carries a promi- nent posterior keel in the middle, which gives rise to a stout digitation; this is connected by a slight palmation of the wing with a very short process, arising from the anterior keel, which has the appearance of an attempt to form an anterior digitation. The termination of the principal digitation is unknown. ‘The spiral lines or striz are continued on the wing and base of the shell, and slightly cross- hatched with axial lines. The posterior keel carries a short curved spine, half a turn above (7. e. opposite) the base of the wing; the existence of a spine between this one and the wing is not indicated in any of the specimens hitherto available. The aperture is triangular to trapezoidal ; the incrustation on the columellar side extended to the edge of the principal keel; canal rather narrow and nearly straight, so far as has been observed. Relations and Distribution.—The specimens on which the above description is based are all from the Inferior Oolite of North Dorset, but the exact horizon is not known. In two of them the anterior ‘‘ semidigitation ”’ is well preserved. If we were desirous of obtaining any evidence as to the existence of an apparent link between the Monodactyls and the Didactyls these fossils seem to afford us a clue. The character of the spire, however, points to the latter rather than to the former, and the general affinities are perhaps almost as much with the mywrus-group as with the trifida-group (Chenopus Philippi, &c.). Though mainly confined to North Dorset there are some badly preserved specimens of Alaria from Dundry in the Bristol Museum, which might probably be classed under one or other of the varieties of Al. Doublieri. We ells Vo ation lil) A single specimen from the Cadomensis-bed of Oborne presents us with a spire in a very perfect condition but without processes of any kind. The spiral angle is nearly 40°, and very convex towards the apex. The apicals consist of two and a half whorls, perfectly smooth and convex; next succeeds a whorl convex and with regular longitudinal coste, extending from suture to suture, and fine spiral striz ; the next whorl, though still very convex, developes a slight keel, whilst very fine spiral lines decussate with costes which are more numerous and finer than in the preceding whorl. Remainder of the spire and body-whorl similar to those of Var. A. ALARIA. 129 It may be that the apical conditions of this specimen are really the same as those of Var. A. There are no certain signs of a spine but rather of a spinous swelling. On the whole there is probably no real difference between Var. A and Var. B, other than what may be due to the preservation of different features in each case. 50. ALARIA: species or variety. (PI. VI, fig. 2.) Differs from the forms already described in the much coarser ornamentation of the higher whorls ; the spiral lines, too, are stronger and wider apart and the keel more salient ; the spiral angle is narrower, and there was an immense spine about one-quarter of a turn above the base of the chief digitation. Founded on an imperfect specimen said to come from the Humphriesianus-zone of Dorset. This I think may prove to be a distinct species. It possibly belongs to the section of Alaria now under consideration, or it may be truly Didactyl, since the character of the penultimate and antepenultimate is greatly that of the trifida-group. ALARIa DuBIA might do as a trivial name. Szotion 2.— Perfectly Didactyl. a. The Myurus-group = the ‘‘ Longicaudes ”’ of Piette. d1. ALARIA SUBLZVIGATA, sp. nov. Plate VI, figs. 3 2,30); 3’ a, 3’ b. Cf. Anarta MyuRUS, Deslongchamps, narrow variety. Hudleston, Geol. Mazg., dee. iii, vol. i, p. 196, pl. vii, fig. 6. Description : Length : : : 28 mm. Width of body-whorl to height of shell . . 44: 100 Spiral angle. : . 34° The points in which this species or variety differs from Al. myurus, Desl., are :—the general form is slightly more elongate in the majority of specimens, the whorls are less tumid, and the position of the spine on the posterior keel is differ- ently placed; in this case being nearly three-quarters of a turn above the commencement of the wing; the anterior keel is also better defined on the side of the columella; the aperture is somewhat more triangular. 17 130 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. Relations and Distribution —In some respects this species has more resemblance to Al. levigata, M. and L., but the position of the principal spine, the comparative straightness of the canal, the keel in the penultimate, and the well-developed spiral lines, should, if Piette’s description is to be accepted, distinguish Al. sublevigata from the Great-Oolite species. Occurs sparingly in the Inferior Oolite of North Dorset, and chiefly in the Sowerbyi- or concavus-bed. The variety shown in figs. 3’ a and 3’ b from Bradford Abbas has a smooth outline, and but for the position of the spine might almost be referred to Al. myurus. The specimen, 3 b, isfrom the Yorkshire Dogger. 52. Ataria MyuRuS, Deslongchamps, 1842. Plate VI, figs 4 a, 4b, 4c. 1842. RosretLarta MyvuRvS, Deslongchamps. Mém. Soc. Linn. Norm., vol. vii, p. 176, pl. ix, figs. 23—25. 1850. PrEROCERA — D Orbigny. Prod., i, p. 270. 1864. Atarta myuRuS, Eud. Desi. Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Frang., p. 30, pl. ii, figs. 8—11, and pl. vi, figs. 11, 12. ? = — Desi. Wycett, Suppl., p. 122, pl. xl, fig. 18. ? — — — Tawney, Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 11. Bibliography, §c.—Deslongchamps’ species is a fossil of the ‘“ Oolithe ferrugi- neuse”’ (Calvados), and belongs consequently to the Upper Division of the Inferior Oolite. It was said to be rare, but Piette qualifies this by stating that it is tolerably numerous. Al. mywrus is not quoted in Morris’s Catalogue of British fossils. Mr. Tawney drew attention to some imperfect specimens from Dundry ; none of these show very characteristic features. The value of the difference between Al. myurus, Desl., and Al. levigata, M. and L., is a question that has been much debated. In 1884 (‘ Geol. Mag.,’ p. 196) I pointed out that the absence of striz, on which alone Morris and Lycett based their distinction, was, under the circumstances, of no value whatever. This was written before I had read Lycett’s note in the Supplement, where, in consequence of his having discovered striz in Al. levigata, he withdrew it as a distinct species. Laube (‘ Gast. von Balin,’ p. 24) endorses this union of Al. levigata and Al. mywrus. Piette, on the other hand, says that, although Al. mywrus is near to Al. levigata, it has the spire more ventricose and less elongate, it is striated almost throughout and the penultimate is subangular. Cossmann (‘ L’Htage Bathonien en France,’ p. 164), alluding to the remarks of Lycett in the Supplement, and of Laube, is disposed to agree with Piette, and separates them as distinct species. On the whole it seems to me that the differences are slight, but apparently constant according to horizon; hence, although the original difference noted by the authors of ALARIA. 131 Al. levigata is admitted to be non-existent, there seem some grounds for distinction in other respects. Description : Length of largest specimen . 35 mm. Width of body-whorl to height of fo . 54: 100. Spiral angle ’ : 1 AOx: Shell fusiform, elongate, about ten whorls ; apicals unknown. The spire is composed mainly of about five very convex whorls, which are covered by fine spiral bands separated by regular furrows. Towards the centre of the penultimate one of these spiral bands becomes conspicuous and forms a slight keel. The body-whorl is bicarinated ; the posterior keel, more salient than the other, gives rise to a strong Spine a quarter of a turn above the base of the wing. The spiral ornamentation is very marked between the keels and in the base of the shell; as many as a dozen spiral bands may be counted between the keels, some of which are continued on the respective digitations ; a system of finer lines intervenes. The wing consists chiefly of two long, diverging digitations, which are subtriangular in section. Piette says that the posterior digitation forms the are of a circle of which the centre is situated towards the point of the spire. The aperture is trapezoidal with a considerable callus on the columella; the canal is said to be long and almost straight, being barely curved at its extremity. Relations and Distribution.—The relations of this, the type species, to such forms as Al. levigata and Al. sublevigata have been already indicated. The possi- bility of some of these latter being immature specimens of Al. myurus has been intimated. It is very rare in the Inferior Oolite of England. One of the figured specimens (4 a) is from Dundry, and is by far the finest ever seen by me from English beds. Figs. 4b and 4 ¢ represent specimens from the clypeus-grit of the Stroud district, which already present some slight differences. The specimen fig. 4¢ m many respects resembles one described by me (‘ Geol. Mag.’ 1884, p. 197) from the Cornbrash of Scarborough as Al. mywrus var. teres. Some might prefer to regard Al. levigata, sublevigata, &c., merely as varieties of Deslongchamps’ species. b. The Trifida-group = the ‘‘ Hamicaudes”’ of Piette. It is by no means easy to decide whether to admit as species the numerous forms of this widely spread group, which have received names from various authors. That its members vary considerably as to size and proportions in the same series of beds may be seen by inspecting the lower figures of Pl. VI. At present it is 132 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. by no means clear to me that the changes of form are coincident with change of horizon only, or that the differences which separate Al. Lorieri from Al. cochleata or Al. trifida are really of biological import. Piette seems to have more faith in the existence of these differences, and it is quite possible that the superior con- dition of the French fossils has justified the separation. In addition to any references which may be given the following general references should be noted : 1829 and 1835. Rosreriaria TRIFIDA, Bean, MS. Phillips G. Y., p. 109, pl. v fig. 14. Compare also 1836. Fusus curvicaupa, Roem. Ool. Geb., p. 140, pl. xi, fig. 6. 1837. Cuenopus Puirippl, Dunker and Koch. Beitr., p. 34, pl. ii, fig. 18. 1844, Rosrenuania Broarinata, Miinst. Goldfuss, Pet., iii, p. 15, pl. 170, 1. 1867. ALARIA COCHLEATA, Quenstedt. Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Frane¢., p. 110, pl. xxii, figs. 1—6. The trifida-group stands out tolerably distinct from all the others. In this country its earliest representative, Al. Lorieri, var. gracilis, appeared in the Murchisone-zone of the Cotteswolds. No traces of it are known to me in the Yorkshire Dogger, nor yet in the Lower Division of the Inferior Oolite in Dorsetshire. 53. Atania Lorigri, D’Orbigny, 1850. Plate VI, figs. 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d; 6a, Ob 6 ar 1850. Prerocera Lorient, D’Orbigny. Prod., i, p. 270. 1867. ALaRiIa — — Piette, Cont. de la Pal. Frang., p. 32; see plates ii, il1, iv, and vi. Compare also 1842, Rosrenparta TRIFIDA, Phillips. Deslongchamps, Mém. Soe. Linn. Norm., vol. vii, p. 171, pl. ix, ? figs. 27, 28. 1869. CuxEnopus Puitipr1, Dunker and Koch. Brauns, Mittlere Jura, p: 170. 1873. Axarta Lorient, D’Orbigny. Tawney, Dundry Gasteropoda, p. 13. Bibliography, §c.—Deslongchamps, who applied the name “ trifida” to all forms of the group from the Lias to the Kimeridge Clay, traced the species back as far as the Upper Lias of Fontaine-Etoupe-Four. But I cannot find in Piette’s work any allusion to the hamicaudes having been represented in the Lias. The following is D’Orbigny’s description of “ Pterocera”’ Lorieri. ‘ A small species near to Pterocera (Chenopus) Philippi, but much more elongate and slender; whorls strongly carinated, finely striated spirally.” He does not mention any localities in Normandy but refers to the Department of the Sarthe. Piette ALARIA. 133 describes three varieties of Al. Loriert. His third variety, which occurs in the ** Oolithe ferrugineuse ” of Bayeux (op. cit., pl. 1, figs. 12—14, and pl. in, figs. 11, 12), might be expected to have most resemblance to our Dorsetshire specimens. There are differences in the Dorset-beds but they do not correspond in all cases to the differences indicated by Piette. Viewed broadly we may say that the trifida-group is represented in the Inferior Oolite by a series of fossils which in France are recognised for the most part as Al. Lorieri, and in Germany as Al. (Chenopus) Philippi. Hach of these has its own set of synonyms, and some English paleontologists would designate the whole as Alaria trifida. Without doubt the Burton-Bradstock fossils must be regarded as representing the Al. Loriert of common repute, though possibly not exactly the Al. Lorieri of D’Orbigny. Three varieties are shown in the accompanying plate, and these I proceed to describe. Var, A. (Figs: 6.4, 6 6, 6c.) Description : Length ; : . 20 mm. Width of last whorl to heeht of shell . 45:100 Spiral angle : 5 30" Shell fusiform, sub-turrited. Whorls nine; apex moderately blunt; apical whorls tumid without keel or ornament; the five succeeding whorls of the spire are strongly carinate; the carina is median, and in well-preserved specimens is seen to be characterised by a furrow. (This is one of the distinctive features of Al. Loriert according to Piette). There are no longitudinal ornaments, but the spiral lines are regular and conspicuous, being most numerous on the posterior area of each whorl]; in the anterior area is a sulcus immediately above the suture, and in the middle of this sulcus is a fine thread-like line, most obvious on the last three whorls; a rim is exposed at the base of the lower whorls, and the suture rather gapes in consequence. ‘The body-whorl is strongly bicarinate, the posterior keel, representing the median carina of the spire-whorls, being the most salient. It gives rise to the posterior digitation (fig. 6 b) which rapidly attenuates in describing a curve, whose centre is a point some little way beyond the apex of the shell. The wing is slightly palmate, the intercarinal space being slightly excavated and spirally striated. The anterior digitation, although arising from the least salient keel, becomes wide and bayonet-shaped for a short distance, and after developing a broad, tongue-like process, curves slightly upwards to its blunt termination (fig. 6 a). 134. GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. The aperture is trapezoidal, the outer lip considerably produced, and each of the wing-digitations deeply channelled ; the canalis broad and comparatively short, since it curves sharply in a direction opposite to that of the anterior digitation, and to this circumstance much of the grotesque appearance of the shell (in common with other members of the trifida-group) is due. This also terminates in a slight expansion. Var. B. (Figs 6 a, 6 0.) Description : Length . z ; 3 . 19—27 mm. Spiral angle : . 28° This form differs from the one ieee daserthed in the comparative narrowness of the spiral angle and in the height of the whorls of the spire in proportion to their width. The slight differences of ornamentation are perhaps the result of accident. We may compare these forms in some respects to Al. gracilis, Lycett. Varo: .(tig. 67a.) Description : Spiral angle about : : . 40° This specimen, which is deeply embedded in uate may be somewhat deceiving in appearance. It is shorter and more widely angled than the majority of speci- mens, and would do very well to represent the “ Chenopus”’ Philippi of Dunker and Koch. Relations and Distribution.—The Parkinsoni-zone of the neighbourhood of Burton Bradstock has yielded nearly all our specimens of Al. Loriert. There is a specimen in the Bristol Museum (fig. 6 d), apparently a fragment of a large specimen of this species. Elsewhere it is very rare, small, and in poor preservation. Under such conditions Al. Loriert or some member of the trifida-group may occasionally be recognised in the Upper Division of the Inferior Oolite in the Cotteswolds. Some specimens of the trifida-group occurring in the Lincolnshire Limestone may possibly belong here likewise, though not the forms from Great Ponton (see Pl. VII, figs 1 a, 1 0, and 2). ALARIA. 135 54, Ataria Lorieri, D’Orb., var. gracilis, Lycett, 1853. Plate VI, fig. 5. 18538. RosteLtarta Graciiis, Lycett. Proc. Cotteswold Nat. Field Club, vol. i, p- 80. Description.—“ Spire lengthened, smooth. Whorls six, lengthened, angulated, the angle being in the middle of the whorl, forming an acute and crenulated carina; body-whorl smooth, with two carine and large digital processes; caudal extremity slender and lengthened. The slender form, crenulated carina, and smooth surface distinguish it from R. trifida.”—Lycerr. The figured specimen, which is believed to be Lycett’s type, presents no crenulations other than the result of usage, and this is also the cause of the smoothness, the spiral lines having been rubbed down almost to obliteration. The appearance of smoothness in fossils obtained from oolitic freestones is in most cases merely due to rolling. The ‘‘ caudal extremity ”’ is not particularly lengthened, and there are indications in the specimen of the commencement of the hamicaudal curve. The mean spiral angle is about 28°. Relations and Distribution.—This variety is more slender than the majority of the specimens referred to Al. Lorieri from the Parkinsoni-zone of Burton Bradstock. It may, in fact, represent the typical Al. Lorieri of D’Orbigny. There is a particular interest attaching to the figured specimen, viz. that it is the earliest recorded example of the trifida-group in this country. It was obtained from the Freestones below the Oolite-Marl near Leckhampton, which are well within the Murchisone-zone. Such fossils must be extremely rare, since no species of the trifida-group is quoted from any horizon of the Inferior Oolite in Witchell’s ‘ Geology of Stroud.’ Since the few species of Alarig hitherto discovered in the British Lias appear to belong to the Monodactyl section, this is the earliest Didactyl Alaria known in this country. 55. ALARIA PONTONIS, sp. nov. Plate VII, figs. 1 a, 1 6, and var. spinifera, Plate VII, fig. 2. Description : Length A : : : 22 mm. Width of body-whorl to height of shell . 900:100 Spiral angle . : F ; . 42° 136 GASTEROPODA OF THE INFERIOR OOLITE. Shell fusiform, scarcely turrited, spire convex. Whorls about nine (only seven observed), tumid; the two sub-apical whorls have longitudinal coste (rarely to be seen for lack of preservation); the two succeeding whorls are either smooth or marked with very fine spirals. Up to this point the increase of the shell is very slow. About the seventh whorl a change takes place, the shell begins to develop more rapidly, a sort of keel is formed somewhat above the middle of the whorl, which is spirally striated throughout; in the penultimate the keel is more pro- nounced ; above the keel the spiral lines are fine and close, below the keel are three primary spirals with very fine intermediate lines. The body-whorl is ventricose, and bicarinate, the upper carina being the most prominent; the spiral ornamentation is continued throughout, and into the base of the shell; there are three principal spiral lines between the digitations. The wing rather broad and didactyl, each carina giving rise to a digitation; the posterior is somewhat the narrower, and sweeps upwards in a curve whose centre is situated near the apex of the shell. The anterior digitation has a tolerably sharp downward curve; it is short, thick, terminating in a sort of blunt point. The aperture is trapezoidal, the outer lip projecting, the wing digitations being slightly channelled. The canal-sheath is thick and short, with a sharp upward curve. The variety Spinifera differs from the shells previously described thus :—no longitudinal costee have been detected on the sub-apical whorls (but this may arise from the accidents of preservation) ; the general outline is less smooth, whereby the anterior whorls are rendered somewhat more angular; the anterior digitation is directed more outwards, and with less of an anterior curve. But the chief difference lies in the tendency to develop spines; the upper carina of the body- whorl carries one or two spines, which are differently placed in different indivi- duals, sometimes a quarter of a turn, sometimes half a turn, above the base of the posterior digitation. In some specimens there seems to have been some on the penultimate. Strictly speaking, this form, which is the commoner of the two, should be regarded as more typical than the smooth specimens. Relations and Distribution.—Always bearing in mind that this species is a member of the trifida-group, it may be separated from Al. Loriert by the non- carinate character of the earlier portions of the spire, by the very different shape of the anterior digitation, by the proportional shortness of the highly curved “‘ tail,” and by the more pupoid aspect of the whole shell, besides minor points of ornamentation. The var. Spinifera still further differs in the development of spines. It has much closer affinities with Alaria pupeeformis, D’ Archiac, a fossil of the Great Oolite of the Hast of France. Piette (op. cit., p. 85, Pl. 13, figs. 1—8) ene Un 4 is a } PLATE I. (All figures natural size, unless otherwise stated.) la, 1b. Purpurina elaborata, Morris & Lycett. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. (Page 85.) 1c, 1d. The same. Another specimen. Same horizon and locality. Buckman collection. 1 ¢, same specimen, part enlarged. 1f. The same. Another specimen. Lincolnshire Limestone, Weldon. My collection. Enlarged. 1g. The same. Another specimen. Dogger, Blue Wyke. Leckenby collection. 2. Purpurina, species or variety. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. Buck- man collection. (Page 91.) 34,3. P. cancellata, sp.nov. Stoford? My collection. (Page 87.) 4a, 4b. Purpurina, species or variety. (? Oolite-Marl.) Nailsworth. Jermyn Street Museum. (Page 87.) 5a,9b. P. bellona, D’Orb. Var. with fine ribs. Parkinsoni-zone, Grove. My collection. (Page 89.) 5c, 5d. The same. Var. with coarse ribs. Parkinsoni-zone. Vitney Cross. My collection. 5e, 5f. The same. Another specimen. Same horizon, locality, and collection. 5g, Same specimen, apical view. 6a,6b. P. curta, sp.nov. Humphriesianus-zone, Milborne Wick. My collection. (Page 90.) 7a, 7b. P. bellona, var. pagoda. Parkinsoni-zone, Burton Bradstock. 7 c, apical view. (Page 89.) 8a, 8b,9a,9b. Purpurina; doubtful forms, related to P. pagoda. (Page 89.) 10a, 106. P. parcicosta, sp. nov. ? Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. (Page 90.) lla, 11b. P. aspera, sp. nov. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. Buckman collec- tion. (Page 91.) llc, 11d. The same. Another specimen. Same horizon and locality. My collec- tion. lle. Large specimen of P. aspera, probably from same place. Jermyn Street Museum. PLATE im Mintern Bros ' i iy { i ¥ 1 ! fa ’ f j Fe ii . : : . ai T i 1 J , £ ‘ ‘ h a i fon . ss ah f 1 ‘| iP) j i — 1 y i Bia ! i y i y ' i i 1 fi f 4 \ i i i if if i a { i / i i} " f " ue if i q i i 4 ij , ‘ pwn i mM ’ e ¥ re ee Ve i J | ot " one i Ves ) , hp. , | * ‘ 7 4 i ‘ a PLATE If. FIGS. la, 1b. Purpurina calcar, sp.nov. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. (Page 91.) 2a,2b. P. inflata, Tawney. Parkinsoni-zone. Burton Bradstock. My collec- tion. lc, apical view. (Page 92.) 2d, 2e. The same. Another specimen. Inferior Oolite, Dorsetshire. My collection. 2f. The same. Another specimen. I. O., Rodboro’ Hill. Jermyn Street Museum. 3a,3b. P. rotunda, sp. nov. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. Buckman collec- tion. 3c, apical view. (Page 93.) 3d. The same. Another specimen. I. O., Dorsetshire. Jermyn Street Museum. 4a,4b. P. tabulata, sp. nov. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. 4c, apical view. (Page 94.) 4d, 4e. Var. of P. tabulata. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. 5a,5b. P. (Hucycloidea) bianor, D’Orbigny. Parkinsoni-zone, Burton Brad- stock. My collection. xX 14. 5c, apical view xX 3. (Page 95.) 5d,5e. The same. Another specimen. xX 13. 5f, 5g. The same. Small specimen. xX 2. Sh, aperture x 4. 6a,6b. P. (Hucycloidea) “ fusiforme.’ Inf. Ool. “Yeovil.” Woodwardian Museum X 13. (Page 96.) 7a,7b. P. (Hucycloidea) carino-crenata, Lycett. Inferior Oolite. Jermyn Street Museum. xX 1}. (Page 97.) 8a,8b. Brachytrema Wrightw, Cotteau, var. despecta. Parkinsoni-zone, Vitney Cross. My collection. x 4. 8c, basal view. (Page 99.) 9a, 9b. B. sub-varicosum, sp.nov. Lincolnshire Limestone, Great Ponton. British Museum. xX 4. (Page 98.) 10a 100. ? Alaria varicifera, sp. nov. Lincolnshire Limestone. xX 4. See also Pl. VII, figs. 8a, &. PLATE IL imp. Mintern Bros . S.Foord del et hth : : al a , > y= a a — y = a af te a ot - = , Se : M 7 i a — = = — wd aad PEATE SU FIGS. la. Malaptera Bentleyi, Morris & Lycett. Collyweston Slate. Jermyn Street Museum. (Page 101.) 1b. Thesame. Anotherspecimen. Impression in gutta percha. My collection. lc. The same. Another specimen. Impression in gutta percha. My collection. 2. M. Bentleyi, var. neglecta. Impression in gutta percha. Collyweston Slate. My collection. (Page 102.) 3a. Spinigera trinitatis, Tawney. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My col- lection. 30, part of spire x 3. (Page 103.) 3¢,3d,3e. The same. Another specimen. Buckman collection. 4a, 4b. S. longispina, Deslongchamps. Humphriesianus-zone (? Sauzei-bed), Sherborne. Buckman collection. Two specimens. (Page 104.) 4c. The same. Another specimen. Hwimphriesianus-zone, Milborne Wick. My collection. 5a. 8. recurva, sp. nov. Parkinsoni-zone, Burton Bradstock Cliff. My col- lection. (Page 105.) 5b. The same. Another specimen. Parkinsoni-zone, Vitney Cross. My collection. x 1%. 5c, 5d. The same. Another specimen. Parkinsoni-zone, Upper Loders. 5 e, spire <3. 5f. The same. Another specimen. ‘‘ Blackrock, Bridport.” Jermyn Street Museum. X 1}. 5g, whorl X 2. 5h, apical portion of spire xX 4. 6a. S. didactyla, sp. nov. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. (Page 106.) 6b. The same. Another specimen. Buckman collection. 6c. The same. Another specimen. Buckman collection. 6d. Variety of S. didactyla. ? Bradford Abbas. Jermyn Street Museum. 6 e, f, g, the same, under three different aspects x 14. 7. S. crassa, sp. nov. Sauzei-bed, Oborne. My collection. (Page 107.) PLATE imp Mintern Bros. Foord del et hth PLATE IV. FIGS. 1. Alaria arenosa, Hudleston. Dogger Sands. Leckenby collection. (Page 110.) 2. Al. angusta, sp. nov. Inferior Oolite. Bristol Museum. (Page 111.) 3. Al. “ crassicostata.” Dogger, Blue Wyke. My collection. (Page 111.) 4, Al. * Hortonensis.” Parkinsoni-zone, Horton Hill. My collection. (Page 112.) 5 a,b. Al. spinulosa.” Two specimens. Dogger, Blue Wyke. (Page 113.) 6a, b,c,d. Al. hamus, Deslongchamps. Four specimens. Parkinsoni-zone, Burton Bradstock. My collection. (Page113.) See also Pl. VII, fig. 9. 7a, Dwarfed var. of Al. hamus. Parkinsoni-zone, Notgrove. 7b, another specimen. Parkinsoni-zone, Horton Hill. My collection. (Page 115.) 7c. Another variety, “‘tricincta.”” Gryphite-grit near Stroud. Witchell collection. (Page 115.) 8a. Al. hamus, var. Phillipsii, D’Orb. Scarborough Limestone, Cloughton Wyke. My collection. 8b, specimen from the Dogger. 8c, from Millepore Rock or Scarborough Limestone. Both Leckenby collection. (Page 116.) 9. Al. hamus, var. nodosa. Inferior Oolite, Stoford. Buckman collection. (Page 117.) 10. Al. pinguis, sp. nov. Inferior Oolite, Dorset. My collection. (Page 117.) See also Pl. VII, fig. 11. 11. Immature form of Alaria? Phillips. Gryphite-grit, near Stroud. Witchell collection. (Page 115.) 12. Al. ef. rarispina, Schlumberger. ? Sowerbyi-bed, Dorset. Whidborne col- lection. (Page 118.) 13a, b,c. A. unicarinata, Hudleston. Three specimens. Dogger, BlueWyke. My collection. (Page 118.) PLATE VW. amp . Mintern Bros ord delet hth FIGS. ib 2. [s) PLATE Vic Alaria wnicornis, Lycett. I. O., Nailsworth. Jermyn Street Museum. (Page 119.) Al. Dundryensis, Tawney. Type zu-Ficurep. I. O., Dundry. Bristol Museum. (Page 122.) . Al. fusca, sp. nov. Cadomensis-bed. Oborne. My collection. (Page 121.) 4, Al. “alienigena.” I. O., Dorsetshire. My collection. (Page 121.) (aD: . Al. Roubaleti, Schlumberger, var. Dorsetensis. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. Showing front and base.’ (Page 123.) . The same. Wide-angled variety. I. O., Dorsetshire. My collection. . The same. Another specimen. I. O., Dorsetshire. My collection. . The same. Another specimen. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. Buckman collection. See also Pl. VII, fig. 10. . The same. Immature form. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. . The same. Small variety. Scarborough Limestone, Pickering Cliff. My collection. . Al. Roubaleti, Schlumb., var. “ dimidiata.” ? concavus-bed, Halfway House. Whidborne collection. (Page 124.) . Al. (compare) unicornis, Lycett, var. Bradfordiensis. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. Buckman collection. (Page 120.) The same. Murchisone-zone, Bradford Abbas. My collection. . Al. pseudo-armata, Hudleston. Dogger, Blue Wyke. lLeckenby collection. (Page 125.) 9. Al. Lotharingica, Schlumberger. I.O., Dundry. Bristol Museum. (Page 10. lel 125.) Al. prelonga, sp.nov. Murchisone-zone, Halfway House. Buckman collec- tion. (Page 126.) Al. Doublieri, D’Orb. var. B. Cadomensis-bed, Oborne. My collection. (Page 128.) ' Explanation of letters—a, anterior spine; p, posterior spine ; c, canal sheath (tail) ; w, wing. \7 v iATE PI Mantern Bros. imp. ord de). et ith. e ll i % 7 ' a A Pal oa ( J s i; , fe ' a ~ ‘ a rr, it } Ss = . abt sts Qik |. et FIGS. PLATE VI. . Alaria Doublieri, D’Orbigny, var. A. I.0O., Dorset. My collection, quarter- view (midway between back and front), and base. (Page 127.) . The same. Another specimen. I.O., Halfway House. Whidborne collection. . The same. Another specimen. I. O., Dorset. My collection. . Al. “dubia.” I. 0., Dorset. My collection. (Page 129.) . Al. sublevigata, sp. nov. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. My collection. (Page 129.) . The same. Another specimen. Dogger, Blue Wyke. Leckenby collection. Al. sublevigata var. Sowerbyi-bed, Dorset. Buckman collection. (Page 130.) . The same. Another specimen. Sowerbyi-bed, Bradford Abbas. Buckman collection. . Al. myurus, Deslongchamps. I. O., Dundry. Woodwardian Museum. (Page 130.) . The same. Clypeus-grit variety, Rodboro’ Common. Witchell collection. 4c, the same. Same locality and collection. . Al. Loriert, D’Orb., var. gracilis, Lycett. Freestones below Oolite Mar], Leckhampton. Brodie collection. (Page. 135) . Al. Lorieri, D’Orb., var. A. P,, Burton Bradstock Cliff. ~My collection. (Page 133.) . The same. Another specimen. P,, Loders. My collection. . The same. Another specimen. P,, Burton Bradstock Cliff. My collection. . The same. Another specimen. ?I.O., Dundry. Bristol Museum. . Al. Loriert, D’Orb., var. B. P,,. Burton Bradstock Cliff. My collection. (Page 134.) . The same. Another specimen. P,, Vitney Cross. My collection. Al. Lorieri, D’Orb., var. C. P,, Burton Bradstock Cliff. My collection. (Page 134.) VI. PLATE Mantern Bros. imp . Foord delet hth % Re _ ; ;. 2 ‘ ‘ i ter P “ ' = 5 if 4 f : . ; Sad * = THE PALAONTOGRAPHICAL SOCLEFY. INSTITUTED MDCCCXLVII. VOLUME FOR 1887. LONDON: A MONOGRAPH INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONTTES THE BRITISH ISLANDS. BY Ss. S BUCKMAN, FE.G:S. PART II. Paars 25—56. Prarrs VII—XIV. LON DONE: PRINTED FOR THE PALZONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY 1888, PRINDED BY ADLARD AND SON, BARTILOLOMEW CLOSE. LIOCERAS BRADFORDENSE. 25 LIOCERAS BRADFORDENSE, var. GIGANTEUM, S. Buckman. Plate XI, fig 1; Plate XII, figs. 4—7, Adult.—Discoid, subcarinate, whorls somewhat compressed, slightly subconvex, ornamented with mere lines of growth; ventral area sloping towards a small, hardly distinct carina. Inner margin regularly concaye and sloping. Inclusion consider- able, normally nearly three-fourths of the preceding whorl. Umbilicus rather deep on account of the absence of any depression on the inner area, and regularly showing portions of the inner whorls. Immature.—At a diameter of about two inches (Plate XII, figs. 5, 6, 7) :— whorls shghtly subconvex, ornamented with not very prominent, simple, sigmoidal ribs, which are obscure on the inner area. Ventral area smooth and flat, with a small, barely distmet carina. Inclusion two-thirds. Umbilicus small and deep, showing portions of the inner area of each whorl down to the centre. At a diameter of about six inches :—ribs single, commencing to become obscure, especially on the inner area. Ventral area smooth, with the carina somewhat more prominent at this age than any other. Inclusion three-fourths of preceding whorl. Umbilicus showing a portion of the inner area of each whorl, which portions exhibit at first some small ribs but are now becoming smooth. The thickness of this variety and its small, deep umbilicus, mark it off asa form which must necessarily attract attention, and at first sight cause it to seem very different from either of the other forms of Lioceras bradfordense. I say other forms because, to be quite correct, 1 ought to notice that, in reality, with this one there are figured three forms of Lioc. bradfordense, showing certain differences from each other. Of the typical variety (at least the one which I had in view when I first mentioned the fossil’), an immature specimen is figured, Plate IV, figs. 5, 6 ; on Plate V a slightly thinner form with wider umbilicus is figured, which, to speak with great precision, is not the more adult form of Plate IV, figs. 5, 6, but of fig. 7; while opposed as it were to this form, but seemingly more distinct from the typical form, is the one we are now treating of, much thicker and with a small, deep umbilicus. The thick and the thin forms seem to be more peculiar to the Beaminster district, while my specimens of the intermediate or typical forms come from Bradford Abbas. Between this form and Ludwigia Murchisone there can hardly be any chance of that confusion which, as I have already shown, may possibly occur between the thin form and that species on account of their remarkable con- vergence in some respects. A comparison, however, of these forms of Lioceras bradfordense with Ludwigia Murchisone on one side and with Ltoceras concavum 1 ‘Quart. Journ. Geol. So.,’ 1881, p. 604. 4 26 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. on the other, might lead a superficial observer, taking no account of ribbing or suture-line, to suppose that the derivation of Lioceras concavum from Ludwigia Murchisone could be demonstrated. We know, however, that the genus Lioceras began, at any rate in the Upper Lias, with Lioceras elegans, Young (not Harpo- ceras elegans, Sowerby),’ and Lioceras elegans is naturally the most probable progenitor of the other species of this genus. From Lioceras concavum this variety is easily separable by its greater thickness, and its umbilicus showing portions of the inner whorls throughout all stages of growth ; from the thicker forms of [ioceras v-scriptum the difference in ribbing, sigmoidal instead of V-shaped, always distinguishes it, in addition to the other features, or even when some of the smaller specimens of Lioceras v-scriptum have a tendency to depart from the ordinary concave umbilicus (Plate X, fig. 7). The young of this form have a great resemblance to a small variety of Lioceras concavum, viz. Lioc. pingue, which, however, possesses finer ribs and continues always with a concave umbilicus (Plate XII, fig. 3 and fig. 7, show the difference in this matter). ioc. pingue also never attains a much larger size than the specimen figured. Lioceras gigantewm occurs in the Murchisone-zone at Beaminster with specimens of Lioceras bradfordense. I do not know of its occurrence in the Brad- ford Abbas district. Plate XI, fig. 1, shows the side view of a very large adult specimen with the greater portion of the test in a fair state of preservation. A large part of the specimen has not been placed upon the plate, as it shows no different character. The last suture is situated at the X. This specimen is from Beaminster and is in my collection. Plate XII, fig. 4, gives the front view of this specimen. The test is present on the ventral area, and is seen on the top of the figure. Plate XI, fig. 5, shows a young specimen from Stoke Knap, near Broad Windsor, Dorset, in my collection; fig. 6 displays the front view; and fig. 7 a sectional view of the umbilicus to compare with fig. 3. Lioceras ampicuum, S. Buckman. Plate VII, figs. 1—6. The Type.—Discoidal, much compressed, subcarinate, whorls merely orna- mented with very fine sigmoidal lines of growth, which at an earlier stage of the shell have exhibited a slight tendency to form very fine ribs. Whorls distinctly convex, forming a slight ridge; this is situated nearly in the middle, and gives to the inner portion with the umbilicus, a regularly depressed, plate-like appearance, only relieved by another slight ridge on the edge of the inner margin. The ventral area 1s narrow, and slopes towards a small, scarcely distinct carina; but on the body- 1 See “Jurassic Ammonites,” S. Buckman, ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ 1887, dec. ii, vol. iv, No. ix, pp. 398—400. LIOCERAS AMBIGUUM. 27 chamber the ventral area is convex, scarcely defined, and has an indistinct keel. This keel is at first formed by the junction of the two convex portions of the ventral area, continuing to meet at a gradually less and less angle, until towards the end of the body-chamber the ventral area is very nearly rounded. Inner margin very shal- low, much sloped on the body-chamber and concave, sometimes slightly crenulated by the ends of the small radii in the interior. The amount of inclusion exhibited at the mouth in the type is a trifle less than half a whorl. (In the figure a little too much inclusion is shown here.) Ata whorl farther back, we find that nearly the whole of the preceding whorlis occluded. (A trifle too much of this whorl is shown in the figure.) Previous to this we find that the amount of inner whorls exposed is proportionately more, and they show us that in youth the specimen was possessed of ribs. The mouth-border is seen in fig. 3, taken from a slightky larger specimen, which exhibits its sigmoidal shape very well. Fig. 4 gives a view from above showing the rounded end of the ventral lappet, but this figure omits to give a very slight keel, which is just perceptible along the middle of the ventral area. A larger specimen, probably adult, measuring 6} inches in diameter, shows the same characters, but the coiling of the umbilicus is more regular, so that the amount of the inner whorls exposed is rather greater, and the appearance flatter, and the recession of the whorl! at the body-chamber is not so abrupt. Young Shell (figs. 5, 6).—Compressed, subcarinate, whorls nearly parallel, slightly concave along the inner area. Up to the diameter of about 10 lines the whorls are evidently ornamented with ribs, probably V-sbaped, and sometimes uniting close to the inner margin; beyond that size the ribs gradually give place to similar lines of growth, with occasional undulations in the shell. The ventral area is broad compared with the other parts of the aperture, and flattened, with a small, just distinct carina. The inner margin is not defined until the ribs disappear, then it becomes concave. The umbilicus is wide and open on account of the presence of the whole of the body-chamber with its receding inner margin. (The actual mouth-border has been slightly broken.) The inclusion is about half a whorl, but evidently, to conform to the dimensions of the umbilicus of the type, the inner margin must for a whorl back advance towards the centre (supposing the shell to continue its growth), and envelop nearly the whole whorl as the additional air-chambers are formed.’ This is a species which, when well preserved, may readily be separated from the others, but a comparison of poorly-preserved specimens makes the task very dificult. Fortunately most of the specimens of this and the other species are in good preservation, but especially the specimens figured on Plate VII, figs. 1, 2, 5, 6. 1 This shows that alterations took place in the air-chambers and in the position of the inner margin, and that when the air-chambers had been partitioned off they were not unalterably fixed, but still had to undergo certain developments and modifications. The whole genus Lioceras gives us examples of this, but perhaps this species more than any other. 28 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. The peculiarities of this species are an inflation and gibbosity of the outer portion and ventral area of the whorl immediately preceding, and up to, the mouth-border ; the very early age at which it becomes quite smooth, merely exhibiting very fine lines of growth (the small ribs shown on fig. 1 are rather too distinct, and are not exhibited by other specimens); and the depressed inner portion of the shell extending from the middle of the whorl to the same part of the samewhorl opposite. The species from which itis most difficult to separate this are Lioceras opalinwm (the open form, Plate XIII, fig. 7), Inoc. decipiens, and Loc. bradfordense. The fine striz on the type-specimen are produced on the lateral area much more than on the ventral, over which they pass almost at right angles to the keel, and this is especially noticeable on the body-chamber. In fig. 4 the strig are rather more produced on the ventral area, as is shown by the drawing of the mouth-border, but they are quite as much produced on the lateral area. ‘This flexure of the striz enables us to separate the species from Lioc. opalinum, in which the forward sweep of the strize on the ventral area is rather peculiar. Besides this, the greater thickness, the depressed inner portion I have mentioned, the possession of ribs in youth, and the expansion in the umbilicus when the body-chamber is present, separate this species from Loc. opalinum. From Lioc. bradfordense the separation is not so obvious. The more discoidal form, caused by its being thinner and also by the depressed inner portion ; the fact of its being smooth at a very early age; the more rounded ventral area of the body-chamber; the small but suddenly expanding umbilicus (not regular as in Inoc. bradfordense) ; but more especially the very different front view; these are the chief points of difference. This front view as well as the thinner, less conspicuous carina, the more sloping ventral area, and the larger umbilicus, distin- guish it from Ivoc. decipiens. Lioc. ambiguum occurs in the Paving-bed (Murchisone-zone) of Bradford Abbas, and also in a quarry near Sherborne, Dorset ; butis certainly a scarceform.’ This species has been quoted from Bradford Abbas under the name Am. aalensis, Zieten (Am. candidus, d’Orb), a species which has different sutures, different ribs, different umbilicus, ventral area, and sectional view. Plate VII, fig. 1, exhibits a very finely-preserved specimen collected by my father many years ago. Fig. 2 gives the front view, a most characteristic feature in this species. Figs. 8, 4 are the termination of another specimen. Figs. 5, 6, represent a young specimen of this species, fig. 5 marking the open umbilicus caused by the presence of the body-chamber. All the specimens are from Bradford Abbas. 1 A poorly preserved specimen, doubtfully referred to this species, I obtained from Haresfield Mill, Bed 10, Section V (p. 48). LIOCERAS AMBIGUUM. 29 LIOCERAS AMBIGUUM, var. costaTuM, S. Buckman. Plate VII, fig. 7. Discoidal, compressed, sub-carinate, whorls almost flat, ornamented with sigmoidal ribs, which are not much bent on the lateral area, and are rather irregular in size, especially on the body-chamber, where they really become undulations. Ventral area narrow and sloping, with a small, barely distinct carina. On the body- chamber the ventral area becomes broader and flatter ; and, the carina almost dis- appearing, the ventral area on the end of the body-chamber appears nearly rounded, while the lines of growth, which were formerly curved forwards on it, now pass over it nearly at right angles. Inner margin sloping and concave. Inclusion covers nearly the whole whorl except where the body-chamber is present, when it suddenly decreases to half the whorl, as is shown in the specimen figured. The mouth- border, of which a portion is shown on the figured specimen, is probably like that in [noceras ambiguum. This form differs from the true Lioceras ambiguum in having a smaller, deeper umbilicus, a less compressed inner area, and well-marked ribs, which last are most conspicuous on the middle of the lateral area, and on the body-chamber gradually become more like waves. (The irregularity of the ribs, depressions, and fine sigmoidal lines of growth are hardly sufficiently brought out im the figure.) Like Lioc. ambiguum it possesses a somewhat inflated, slightly gibbous, outer and ventral area near the end of the body-chamber ; but, not having such a marked depression in the inner area, it does not show this character so conspicuously. From Lioc. bradfordense this form is best separated by its irregular ribs. They do not actually bifurcate, but between them intermediate ribs occur on the outer por- tion of the whorl. The ribs, too, are more conspicuous on the middle of the lateral area, whilst those of Lnoc. bradfordense are stronger on the outer area. The shape of the umbilicus also differs, being more occluded, especially in the inner whorls. The whole shell is also thinner than Loc. bradfordense ; and in all its proportions except the size of its umbilicus, and in not having quite so much depression, it closely agrees with Loc. ambiquum. I have every reason to believe that the Murchisone-zone is the correct horizon in which this variety is found. The figured specimen has not its locality recorded, but I judge it to be from Haselbury in Somerset. From that locality I have some other very closelyallied forms, not well preserved, which differ shghtlyin their ribbing and the coiling of the umbilicus, but not materially in their general appearance. In all these specimens the suture-line differs slightly from the sutures of Lioceras in general in having a deeper superior lateral saddle (a singular fact when we consider that such usually accompanies ribs that are much produced on the lateral 30 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. area), a shorter inferior lateral lobe, and a rather greater distance between the sutures.’ Haselbury is the only locality where I know this form in the South- west, and it is evidently very scarce; but I have obtained, from Birdlip, in Glouces- tershire, from a fallen block of Oolite belonging probably to the Sandy Ferruginous beds,” a portion of a specimen which has every appearance of being this form. Plate VII, fig. 7, shows a well-preserved specimen of Lioceras costatum, with its test complete and the commencement of the mouth-border. The absence of a piece of test on the other side shows us the sutures. Liocrras DecrPtens, S. Buckman. Plate XII, figs. 8, 9. Discoidal, much compressed, carinate, whorls very slightly convex, entirely without any ornamentation except sigmoidal lines of growth. Ventral area very narrow, only slightly sloped, with a carina somewhat distinct except on the body- chamber. Inner margin sloping, concave, and shallow. Inclusion normally about three-fourths of the whorl, slightly less when the body-chamber is present. Umbilicus small, with a constant increase of the amount exposed, and with few turns because the diameter of the shell increases quickly on account of the breadth of the whorls. It is possible to confound Lioceras decipiens with almost any of the other species of this genus; but if the points of divergence be accurately noted and the deter- mination of the other species be correctly made, it will be seen that this one differs in many points, which, though individually small, become collectively important. From any varieties of Lioceras concavum with which I am acquainted it is separable by the entire absence of ribs, by its larger umbilicus, which continually exposes a greater amount of the inner whorls, by the flatness, but not actual concavity, of the inner area, and by the more actual separation of the carina from a flatter ventral area. It has a peculiar umbilicus, smaller than that of Lioc. bradfordense, and, when the body-chamber is absent, even smaller than that of Lioc. giganteum ; but when the body-chamber is present the umbilicus expands suddenly to about the same size as the umbilicus of the latter without its body-chamber, so that this species can be readily distinguished by its method of coiling. It is also smoother at all ages, much thinner and flatter, with more parallel sides, broader whorls, a narrower and flatter ventral area, and therefore seemingly a more important carina. The last, too, distinguishes it from Lioc. opalinum, which has a much sloping ventral area without a distinct carina, and has not such a sudden expansion My present intention is to figure the suture-lines of the various species together in convenient groups for the sake of comparison, and then to discuss them. * See section of Haresfield Hill (p. 43). The beds described as D' are probably on the horizon from which this specimen came. LIOCERAS DECIPIENS. 31 of the umbilicus at the body-chamber. From Lioc. ambiguum its front view, more parallel sides, and smaller umbilicus, will distinguish it.' The horizon of this species is very easily determined because in the matrix of the body-chamber of the figured specimen are embedded some examples of Ithynchonella ringens. This would prove it to come from the lower part of the Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). Judging from the matrix, the species occurs near Sherborne, Dorset ; but it is certainly scarce, and I do not know of it in any other part of the district. Plate XII, fig. 8, represents a good specimen of this species with its test well preserved. The whole of the body-chamber is present and a part of the termination. |The piece of test on the body-chamber has been transferred from the other side of the specimen for the purpose of figuring. | LIocERAS DECIPIENS, var. sIMILE, S. Buckman. Plate XV, figs. 1, 2. I have only this one specimen of a very peculiar form, which is so well preserved and has such marked and yet similar characters, that I have thought it well to distinguish it by a varietal name. Mr. Gawan has given a very good figure of it, from which it will be seen that it has a great resemblance to Lvoceras decipiens ; but it differs in possessing very small ribs on the outer area at a later age, in having a much smaller umbilicus with deeper walls, and in being consid- erably thicker. We perceive what is probably the commencement of the termination, and the X shows the length of the body-chamber. There is a peculiarity in the structure of the carina, which is broadish, rounded, distinct from the ventral area, and yet not prominent, which, together with the smoothness of the test, at once seem to unite this form to Loc. decipiens. If we compare the figure of this form with the large figure of Lioceras gigantewm, we see much resemblance, and, did we not possess a series of smaller specimens of the latter, we might reasonably consider Loc. simile to be the young of Iioceras gigantewm. The umbilicus of Loc. simile is fairly well preserved, and allows of examination, but the large specimen of Lioc. gigantewm does not possess quite all the umbilicus drawn by the artist. This umbilicus of Lioc. gigantewm as thus filled in does not 1 It was not until this sheet was passing through the press that I was able to obtain and study Quenstedt’s work ((Amm. Schwabischen Jura’). Ammonites Murchisoneé planatus (pl. lix, figs. 16 and 17) has close resemblance to this species and its varieties. It evidently belongs to the genus Lioceras and should not be classed with Murchisone (Ludwigia) as Quenstedt has done. It differs . from Lioc. decipiens and simile in having a larger umbilicus with more whorls, also in having narrower and more quadrate whorls with shorter aperture, so that, though closely allied, it is evidently not the same, but might, perhaps, eventually be conveniently classed as a variety. Loc. decipiens, simile, and intermedium, with Quenstedt’s Am. Murchisone planatus, seem to form a small, closely-allied scries of smooth Liocerata. 32 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. agree with the umbilicus as exhibited by smaller specimens of that species and is therefore likely to mislead. A comparison of Lzoc. simile with Lioc. gigantewm of the same diameter, shows a much deeper, narrower, and smoother umbilicus, a more compressed ventral area, a greater thickness of section at the inner area, and the test far smoother in texture, with smaller ribs which disappear early, while it is seen that specimens of Lzoc. gigantewm carry the opposite characters throughout their growth, the ribs, especially, being visible in the later as well as in the earlier portions of the umbilicus. The umbilicus of Loc. simile is certainly different to that of the large or small specimens of Lioc. giganteum, appearing to possess fewer coils, and not to have that somewhat excavated appearance which the umbilicus of specimens of that species has. Between Lioc. decipiens and its variety Lioc. sinvile in the Sowerbyi-zone there exists a relationship similar to that between Lioc. bradfordense and its variety Inoc. gigantewm in the Murchisone-zone, and to that, which, however, seems stronger, between the thick and thin forms of Lioc. opalinwm in the zone of that name. Comparing the specimens from these three zones it seems not unlikely that the first were derived from the two forms of Lioc. opalinwm, to which species they have much resemblance in smooth character of test, small umbilicus, &c., but from which they differ in the shape of ventral area and carina; while, on the other hand, the second have rather more the appearance of exaggerated forms of Inoc. elegans, Young (not Sowerby). In this case we have to suppose, first, the existence of links in the Murchisone-zone, and, secondly, of links in the Jurense- and Opalinum-zones which we do not at present possess. Another theory might be that Lioc, decipiens and Lioc. simile had been derived from Lioc. opalinum through Lioc. bradfordense and Lioc, giganteum, but then we must suppose that Inoc. opalinum gradually changing became ribbed and took on a different method of coiling and a different form (bradfordense), and that next those forms reverted to a method of coiling and ribbing similar to that at first possessed by L. opalinum (decipiens). I scarcely favour this view; but, if the former be correct, we ought to describe our specimens as Lioc. opalinum mut. decipiens and Lioc, opalinum mut. simile, or Lioc. opalinum mut. sp. ?, mut. decipiens or svmile,—an innovation which, though very probably expressing the true state of the case, our present knowledge hardly warrants our adopting. It is, however, interesting to bear these conclusions in mind, for it perhaps tends to demonstrate that any attempt to class Inoc. decipiens and Lioc. simile as smooth varieties of Lioc. brad- fordense and Lioc. gigantewm, would be quite unadvisable. I'he probable position of the specimen is the Sowerbyi-zone near Sherborne, but Tam not able to speak with certainty, It must be avery scarce form. Plate XV, figs. 1,2, give avery good idea of a well-preserved specimen with just the commencement of the mouth-border, and with the last of the fine ribs before it became quite smooth. LIOCERAS DECIPIENS. 33 LIOcERAS DECIPIENS, var, INTERMEDIUM, S. Buckman, Plate XI, figs. 2—7. Type.—Discoidal, somewhat compressed, carinate, whorls broad, slightly convex on the outer and slightly concave on the inner area, ornamented with somewhat indistinct sigmoidal ribs until the shell obtains the diameter of about 16 lines, and then they change to very fine sigmoidal lines of growth, with a marked curve on the middle of the lateral area. The ventral area slightly slopes and is sub-convex, carrying a distinct but by no means trenchant carina. ‘The inner margin is concave, sloping, and shallow. The inclusion is three-fourths of the preceding whorl; the umbilicus quite regular, rather shallow, and ornamented with small ribs. The sub-variety A is very similar, but the carina is very slightly more con- spicuous; the ribs are at all times rather obscure; the whorls do not seem to increase in breadth so quickly; the umbilicus is distinctly larger and shows scarcely any ornamentation, while the inner margin is more upright. This sub- variety is also more compressed than the varietal type. The sub-varvety B is again different in many ways. The ribs are more distinct aud continue until the shell attains a larger diameter; they are indistinct on the inner area; the carina is similar to that possessed by the varietal type, but the ventral area is somewhat flatter; the umbilicus is distinctly larger and shows more of the inner whorls, with small but fairly conspicuous ribs ; the inner margin ig more upright and the sides of the whorls are nearly parallel. These three very peculiar forms constitute a more or less connecting link between the genus Myperlioceras and the true Liocerata. The term intermedium is appropriate, for they seem to possess some of the characters of three species which occur in the same stratum with them. On looking at them all anyone can well understand the perplexity which has so frequently accompanied attempts to separate the Dorsetshire Ammonites; and we need not wonder at the often expressed opinion, that hybridisation among Ammonites was a thing of common occurrence. ‘Tio my mind it seems that we have at present to deal with a genus (Lioceras) which, having existed for some time, became one of the dominant genera, and constantly made new efforts at variation. In time these variations would become more and more marked, and their characters more constant, until they could be fairly ranked as species. At this stage they could not be directly united together by any coeval intermediate forms, their common ancestor being the only link between them. Lioc. intermedium, as I have said, combines some of the characters of at least three different species, and, curiously enough, two other genera. With the ventral area, carina, and general shape of Ludwigia cornu, the suture-line and ribbing of Inoceras, and the early absence of ribs, which gives them the very smooth 5 34. INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. appearance of Hyperlioceras, they may be said to be intermediate in every sense. My own idea is that they really constitute a distinct species, but as I have not been able to obtain the young of Loc. decipiens for comparison, | prefer to leave the matter in its present state. From Lioc. decipiens they may be distinguished by a larger and more ribbed umbilicus, a less compressed form, and a broader, more convex ventral area; but what further makes me incline to the idea that they may be a separate species is the fact that, although they occur at Bradford Abbas not un- frequently, | have not found one larger than is here depicted. On the other hand, Iroc. decipiens occurs at Sherborne, and, as far as I know, has not been found at Bradford Abbas. From Ludwigia cornu these forms are separated by an entire difference in ribbing, by their extreme smoothness of test, and by greater thickness ; from other species of Ivoceras by their smoothness, quadrate appearance, and more distinct carina; from Hyperlioceras Walkeri by a smaller carina, and a form less com- pressed on the outer, but more compressed on the inner area, and a generally larger umbilicus. It must be confessed however, that the separation of Lioceras untermedium from the young forms of Hyperlioceras Walkeri is not always easy to make, and is not so definite as could be wished. One reason for this may be pointed out : the strong carina of the latter becomes much less trenchant as it approaches and reaches the body-chamber ; and, if a specimen in this state be compared with a specimen of the former which lacks both the body-chamber and many of the air-chambers, there is but little difference in the amount of carina present ; so that it becomes important to compare specimens which are alike but distinguishable by the absence or presence of the body-chamber. Inoc. intermedium and most of the species of Hyperlioceras have been formerly quoted from Bradford Abbas under the name of Am. leviusculus, Sowerby ; from this they may be separated by their possessing (among many points of difference) a concave inner margin and a solid carina. The Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds) at Bradford Abbas has yielded all the Specimens in my collection that have their localities recorded. It is not an un- common species, and may probably have been met with at the similar quarries at Half-Way House, Louse Hill, &c., but the matrix shows that none have come from Sherborne, nor any other parts of the district, at least within my knowledge. Plate XI, figs. 2, 3, may be regarded as illustrating a type-form of Lioceras intermedium. Figs. 4,5 show us a large-centred, more compressed, and smoother form. This is the scarcest of the series. In Figs. 6, 7 we have a more ribbed form with a larger umbilicus than in Fig. 2. All these figured specimens have come from Bradford Abbas. In Plate XII, fig. 10, a specimen is depicted which shows us where the difficulty lies in separating this species from Hyperlioceras Walkeri. This LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 35 specimen, though slightly different from either, seems to be to a certain extent intermediate in character, and its true position is not easy to determine. It is figured in the hope that more specimens may be collected. LIocERASs OPALINUM (Reinecke). Plate XIII, figs. 1—10. 1818. Navritvus opatinus, Reinecke. Maris Protog., p. 55, figs. 1, 2. 18380. ? AMMONITES PRIMORDIALIS, Zieten. Verstein. Wiirtt., pl. iv, fig. 4.! 1849. — OPALINUS, Quenstedt. Die Ceph., pl. vii, fig. 10. 1867. LeiocrRas opaLinum, Hyatt. Bulletin Mus. Comp. Zool., vol. i, No. 5, p- 101. P1874. AmMonites concavus, Dumortier. Etudes pal. Bassin du Rhone iv, pl. xiii, figs. 1, 2, 3. 1874, — opaLinus, Dumortier. Ibid., pl. xlix, figs. 14, 15, 16. 1878. Lupwieta opatina, Bayle. Explic. carte géol. France, pl. Ixxx, figs. 1, 5, 6. 1884. Harpoceras opaLinuM, Wright. Lias Amm. Pal. Soc., pl. Ixxx, figs. 6—8 (not 5, but perhaps 8). 1885. -- — E. Haug. Beitr. Monog. Harpoceras, Neues Jahr- buch, Beil.-Bd. iii, p. 681. 1886. — -- Vacek. Oolithe Cap San Vigilio, Abh. der k. k. geol. Reichsanstalt, Bd. xii, No. 3, pl. vi, figs. 4 and 11 only. 1886. -- ELEGANS, Vacek (non Sowerby, non Young and Bird). Ibid., pl. vii, fig. 17 only. 1886. AMMONITES OPALINUS, Quenstedt. Amm.Schwabischen Jura, pl. lv, figs. 1, 2, 3, 10, 12, 18 only, 22?, but cer- tainly not 9, 18, 16, 20, 21, &e. 1875. Non AMMONITES OPALINUS, Lepsius. Beitrige Juraf. Unter-Elsass, pl. ii, figs. 4,5, which I believe to be another very different species. Discoidal, compressed, subcarinate, whorls slightly convex, with a very small depression in the inner area, ornamented with numerous very fine sigmoidal striz, which have a strong forward sweep on the ventral area. The ventral area in the young state slopes acutely, and possesses a small sharp carina. As the shell increases, the latter gradually lessens, and the ventral area becomes less and less acute, until at last on the body-chamber of the adult the ventral area is actually rounded (Pl. XIII, fig. 2). The inner margin is slightly concave, rather upright in the type-form except on the body-chamber. The inclusion is, as usual, slightly less 1 This figure shows a much wider umbilicus, and the strie very straight. It is evidently not typical, and may not be a synonym of ioc. opalinum, 36 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. in the young than afterwards, when it takes up nearly the whole whorl, leaving a very narrow terrace; if the body-chamber be present the inner margin recedes' so that the mouth envelops about two-thirds of the preceding whorl. The termination to the body-chamber in the young consists of a lateral process,” probably continued until the shell reaches a nearly mature age, and which I previously thought was | at NV Fia@. 1.—Suture-line of Lioceras opalinum. Natural size. continued through life; but lately the finding of several adult specimens, with the termination quite complete, has shown me conclusively that in adult age the termination is sigmoidal, slightly produced and rounded on the lateral area (the lateral horn having disappeared), and is much produced on the ventral area; and therefore these characters of the termination are quite in accordance with what we observe in the other species of this genus. The suture-line of this species (Fig. 1), which must also be considered as the typical suture line of the genus Lioceras, is taken from a large specimen collected at Haresfield Hill, and is the last suture but one. It will be seen that the points that I have noticed about these sutures (p. 21), and their difference from those of Ludwigia, are here fully borne out, and that the sutures of Lioc. bradfordense 1 This recession of the inner margin of the body-chamber from the regular line of coil is a fact to be observed in most Ammonites, but is more especially developed in certain genera. In Lioceras it is always very marked, and is present at all ages; and it must of course follow, for the umbilicus to obtain the small form which it exhibits when the shell is much larger, that, as the body-chamber advances and the inner chambers are formed, the inner margin gradually extends inwards and gradually takes up its proper position on the regular line of coil. As an example; that part of the inner coil now exposed, just between the inner margin of the mouth and the inner margin of the previous whorl (PI. XIII, fig. 1), would be almost covered by the time the shell had grown another half whorl. The same holds good with specimens of all ages. This is readily seen in any series of specimens, of various ages, of a species belonging to the genus Lioceras which possesses the mouth-border ; and it is a fact which must be especially observed in any determinations of these species, because it is quite possible to find a shell, not having the body-chamber preserved, showing a smaller umbilicus than one nearly half a whorl less in diameter possessing the body-chamber. It is most important to keep this fact well in view when tracing a form from youth to adult age; and, when measuring the umbilicus, the amount of body-chamber present must always be taken into consideration. If these points be not strictly attended to in a complex genus like Lioceras, with so many forms, it will lead to the confusion not only of varieties but of species. ? Quenstedt, ‘ Cephalopoda,’ pl. vii, fig. 10, shows this species with lateral process complete. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 37 (Plate IV, fig. 8), and of Lioc. v-scriptum (Plate IX, fig. 4), agree exactly with the suture here shown. I have found, too, that the sutures of all the species of Lioceras agree in a remarkably exact manner with this pattern. I shall, later on, have more to say on this point when figuring and discussing them in comparison with those of other genera. Dr. Wright, in his Monograph ‘ Lias Ammonites,’ Plate LX XX, has mistaken the suture-line of this species, as I have pointed out in the ‘ Geological Magazine.” On account of the additional material which is being constantly obtained for the purpose of this work, it unfortunately cannot be avoided, that both in the plates and the letterpress, certain species are placed somewhat out*of order, although in the letterpress, and as far as possible in the plates, the sub-groups will be kept to themselves. A short time ago, at the commencement of the present year (1887), I possessed only a few small specimens of Lnoceras opalinum from Dorset. Having now obtained a fine series from Gloucestershire, with many new features, I consider it necessary to give a further account of this species (see Dr. Wright’s Monograph, loc. cit.), and thus more fully complete the series of species belonging to the genus. It is very singular that in the Cotteswold district so much confusion should have always prevailed as to the proper characteristics of this species, and so much desire should always have been expressed to include other totally different species in this or to merge it in others. At p. 148 of his Monograph Dr. Wright regarded Lycett’s Harp. Moorei as a variety of Harp. opalinum ; but afterwards he figured them for comparison on the same plate, considering Lycett’s species to be a synonym of Zieten’s Am. aalensis. Dr, Lycett, too, has been quite willing to drop his own species, for in some M8, notes, which Dr. Wright quotes im extenso (pp. 465, 466), and which, by the kindness of Mr, W.C. Lucy, F.G.S., I have seen, he has considered it correct to place Am. aalensis, Moorei, costula, and other forms as synonyms of Am. opalinus. Several reasons may be given as contributing to form this opinion; first, the condition in which the Cotteswold Ammonites frequently occur is such as will not allow of an examination of their more minute characters; next, the number of apparently very similar forms which occur together in a thin series of strata; and especially the fact that probably the identification of one or two of the chief species has been more or less loose and incorrect. Dr. Lycett almost admits as much in his MS. notes, when he says that no specimen of Am. opalinus has rewarded his efforts at Frocester Hill; and none of the specimens figured by Dr. Wright as Harpoceras aalense appear to me to belong to Zieten’s Am. aalensis. Probably, therefore, the argument is founded on an unsound basis. No doubt there is a perplexing number of 1 «The Lobe-line of certain Lias Ammonites,’ S. S. Buckman, ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ dec. iii, vol. iii, No. 10, 1886, p. 442. 38 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. forms with seemingly small differences (especially when badly preserved), but in my opinion these forms can be shown to be descended from most different sources and to possess certain constant differences both in structure and detail. To put Am. Moorei, aalensis, and opalinus (if correctly identified) into the same species is to ignore their true affinities, to entirely overlook the differences in their suture, the different shape and flexure of their ribs or strize, their different mode of growth, as well as their different parentage. An attempt to uniteas one species Am. opalinus with Am. concavus, Sow., or Am. elegans, Young, would, I think, be more reasonable, but not such a species as Am. opalinus with either Am. Moorei or Am. aalensis. From nearly all the other species of the genus Lvoceras this species is separated by an entire absence of ribs at all ages, by the possession of numerous very fine hair-like sigmoidal striz, more prominent than mere lines of growth, and produced on the ventral area more than is usual with other species of this genus. Its small umbilicus showing portions of the inner whorls is also distinctive. Probably considerable difficulty may be experienced in appreciating the differ- ences which exist between Lioceras opalinum and Am. elegans, and therefore a few words to try and put the matter in as clear a light as possible may not be out of place. The first thing, however, is the correct appreciation of what Am. elegans really is, and on this point much confusion has existed. Sowerby was the first to figure and describe Am. elegans, and paleontologists have always experienced considerable difficulty in deciding what the species actually is that he so figured. As it does not come within my province to write a full account of this species, with the various views that have been adopted, I only say that I believe the specimen figured by Sowerby has a hollow carina and belongs to the true Falciferi, 1. e. Harpoceras falciferum, Sow., subplanatum, Oppel, &c., and consequently belongs to a genus entirely different from Lioceras, namely, to the genus Harpoceras restricted.’ Subse- quently Young and Bird gave a not very intelligible figure of an Ammonite under the name elegans, but this is not Sowerby’s species. Dr. Wright, being unable to identify Sowerby’s species, retained the name elegans, for Young and Bird’s species ; and the specimen he figured on Pl. LIII, figs. 1, 2, 3, he described in his text as Harpoceras elegans, Young (non Sowerby). Taking this figure as really representing Young and Bird’s species, I believe that it evidently differs from Am. elegans, Sowerby, and belongs to the genus Lvoceras; and hence we may now retain the name. Then from Lioceras elegans (Young) Lroc. opalinum is distinguished by possessing fine striz during the whole of its growth, by possessing a much less acute carina, and a more compressed ventral area. Probably the best distinction is the possession of fine falciform ribs by the young forms of Lvoceras 1 “On Jurassic Ammonites,” S. 8S. Buckman, ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ dee. iii, vol. iv, No. ix, 1887, p. 397. Harpoceras is here used only for the true Falciferi. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 39 elegans. Specimens that I have from Yorkshire show these ribs very well, and they are quite different from the strive of Lioc. opalinum. Vacek’s Harpoceras elegans, which is here quoted as a synonym, does not seem to show this character, and, judging from the side view, it has the ventral area almost uncarinated like Lioc. opalinum. In my list of synonyms Dumortier’s figures of Am. concavus are also quoted ; but they are not the Am. concavus of Sowerby, as a comparison with my figure of Sowerby’s original specimen will show (Pl. II, figs. 6, 7). They are generally supposed to be Am. elegans, but they do not show the ribbing of Loc. elegans (Young), nor are they Harpoceras elegans (Sowerby). The shells seem to be two different forms, either closely allied to Loc. opalinum or else intermediate between it and Lvoc. elegans ; in fact, they can scarcely be said to agree exactly with the types of either species, although the fine ribbing and the sectional view of fig. 3 with little cara approach more to Ivoc. opalinum than to Lioe. elegans. Besides the form of Lioc. opalinum which since it agrees with Reinecke’s figure I consider typical (Plate XIII, figs. 4, 5, and adult, figs. 1, 2), I have met with other forms showing a slight amount of difference usually traceable from youth to adolescence in any considerable series of specimens. The most distinct is perhaps the thin form, which is rather the commoner, and differs from the type by its shallow, more open umbilicus, with very sloping walls, and in being thinner (Plate XIII, figs. 7, 8,9, 10). Then there is the form figured in Dr. Wright’s Mono- graph (Plate LXXX, figs. 5, 6), which is somewhat thicker than the typical form. Besides these we have certain forms, with false ribs on the inner area, connecting us with the variety comptum, which I will consider under that heading. From this species I would expressly exclude certain specimens which are rather frequently met with in the Cephalopoda-bed of the Cotteswolds, and seem to very closely resemble the figure given by Lepsius previously quoted. Indeed I feel certain that, nothwithstanding their similarity in many respects, especially to the open-centred form of Lioc. opalinum, yet since they possess a less complex suture- line with practically only one small auxiliary lobe, they really belong not only to another species but to another genus. When closely compared with Lioc. opalinum they are seen to have straighter ribs on the lateral area (ribs and not striz as in the case of Lioc. opalinum), and also to possess a more prominent and trenchant carina. The width of the umbilicus, with its rather upright walls, is at all ages considerably in excess of that shown in the open Loc. opalinum. I cannot help thinking that it is this species having a close affinity to Grammoceras Moorei (Lycett), that has partly given rise to the opinion of that species being only a variety of Loc. opalinum. The absence almost of even a sub-carina in Live. opalinum, except in the young state, and the rounded character of the ventral area (all trace of keel being lost), 4.0 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. when the body-chamber is present (Pl. XIII, fig. 2), cannot be said to be quite the rule in the Liocerata, though some old specimens of other species exhibit a tendency this way. It is most certainly a feature in Oppelia, and is worthy of notice in that connection.? When treating of the genus Lioceras I have stated my reasons for choosing this species as the type of the genus in preference to any of the other species which Hyatt placed in it, and etymologically this name applies to the species very well.” The specific name was probably given by Reinecke on account of the opalescent tints sometimes seen on the inner coat of the test. I have collected Lioc. opalinum at Haresfield Hill,> in bed No. 15 (p. 43), plentifully, well-preserved, and of large size, with the mouth-border complete (Pl. XIII, fig. 3). In bed No. 16 I have found it of smaller size and not so frequently. I have obtained it from the same horizons at Frocester Hill; and the same remarks as to size and position apply to beds Nos. 4 and 5 of the Coaley Wood Section. From North Nibley I have some small specimens from bed No. 6, and the late Mr. H. Witchell, F.G.S., showed me some specimens which he had obtained at Little Sodbury, near Yate. I do not know of its occurrence in Somerset, though it is probable that its real bed occurs at the bottom of some of the quarries at Haselbury, Misterton, &c., but has been overlooked. In Dorset Burton-Bradstock Cliff is the chief locality, whence I have many specimens, but none over three inches in diameter, From Stoke Knap I have it; but it is very scarce. I have not seen it from the Sherborne and Bradford-Abbas side of the County, and it is probable that the whole zone is entirely absent. Through the kindness of Mr, EH. A. Walford, F.G.S., I have seen some specimens from Otley Hill, near Hook Norton, North Oxfordshire (p. 52); and by the kindness of Mr. B. Thompson, F.G.S., a specimen from New Duston, Northamptonshire (p. 48), with specimens of Lioceras comptum (Reinecke). Plate XIII, figs. 1, 2, show a large typical specimen of this species, the test of which is extremely well preserved. In fig. 2 the rounded ventral area of the body-chamber is noticeable; and, as the ventral area is well-preserved and has the test present, there can be no mistake about it. In Fig. 3 we have a portion of a large specimen, five and a half inches in diameter, with the mouth-border, while what this is in youth is partly indicated in fig. 12. These specimens came from Haresfield Hill, Gloucestershire, from the bed No. 15 in the section at p. 43. Figs. 4, 5, illustrate a smaller typical specimen, of a size to compare with Reinecke’s 1 IT do not, however, consider that Oppelia is descended from Lioc. opalinum, because I think that in Am. discoides, Zieten, we have one of the earliest forms of Oppelia-like species. Am. discoides occurs just below Lzoc. opalinum. * Névos, smooth ; Kepas, horn. ’ Marked as Standish Beacon on the Ordnance Survey Map. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 4] original figure. This specimen came from bed No. 5 of the Coaley-Wood section (p. 45). Vig. 6 is a very small specimen of the typical form, for comparison with fig. 11, and indicating that the typical form is constant in its ornamentation throughout life. This specimen is from Burton Bradstock, Dorset. Figs. 7, 8, give a variety, slightly thinner and having a considerably larger umbilicus. This form is rather the commonest of all. In Fig. 8 is indicated the outer portion of the ventral area on the top of the figure, peculiarly compressed, probably due in part to absence of test. Figs. 9, 10, illustrate a younger form of this kind. In figs. 7 and 9 the peculiar, much sloped inner margin, which gives the specimens a singular appearance, is scarcely brought out. These specimens are from Hares- field Hill, bed No. 15. The fig. 1 at p. 36 displays the suture-line of this species ; it was taken from a large adult specimen, and must be considered as typical for the genus Lioceras. Inoceras opalinwm is an Ammonite which has given its name to a certain zone or series of strata lying between the /uwrense-zone below and Murchisone-zone above ; and this horizon with the beds below, the Sands especially, down to the Upper Lias Clay, has caused much debate whether it should be classed with the Lias or the Oolite. At pages 2—5 I have given a few notes upon the subject, and the opinions of some authors; but, as I had not then seen the sections in Gloucestershire where this zone is exposed, and had only been able to obtain an imperfect view of those in Dorset, I purposely refrained from giving any opinion as to the desirability of classing the Opalinwm-zone with the Lias as Dr. Wright had done, or with the Inferior Oolite (or at any rate distinct from the Lias) as most other authors have been inclined to do. Since, however, I have had opportunities of thoroughly examining the Gloucestershire sections at Frocester, Coaley Wood, Cam Down, &c., and especially at Haresfield Hill, I have come to the conclusion that the sections in Gloucestershire furnish no reason at all for classing the Opalinwm-zone otherwise than in accordance with what has been, I believe, the usual custom, namely, as distinct from the Lias. Dr. Wright, at p. 148 of his ‘ Monograph on the Lias Ammonites,’ gives “a thin band of hard ferruginous marl” as the Opalinum-zone at Haresfield, and states that he had found a piece of rock which, itself containing Inferior-Oolite fossils, had on its underside an impression of Harp. opalinum. Since, however, I have found most of my specimens of this species in this rock I cannot do better than clearly point out the position which Inoceras opalinum occupies. The following sections not only show the relation- ship of the Opalinwm-zone to the beds above it, but also, through the Sands to the Upper Lias Clay below; and, since we shall have to discuss several species of 6 42 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES, Ammonites which occur in these beds, their insertion here in their sequence will be useful. It will be seen that Lioc. opalinum occurs only sparingly, and of small size, in the top of what has generally been called the Gloucestershire Cephalopoda-bed! (or rather well up in Bed 16, Haresfield), but that it is most abundant and of largest size (five and a half inches in diameter) in the hard rock above, that is, exactly in the position where Quenstedt states it should come.’ It is this rock, a foot or so thick, very hard, emitting a metallic ring when struck, that Dr. Wright must have considered to be Inferior Oolite, while placing the beds below in the Upper Lias, because this rock could not in any way be called a “thin band of hard ferru- ginous marl’’ a description which does apply to the beds below. Dr. Wright’s statement seems to mean that Loc. opalinwm occurred in the thin band of marl even so high up as to leave its impression on the rock above, but, as it did not occur in the rock itself, here was the dividing line between the Opalinum- and Murchisone-zones, and therefore between the Lias and Oolite. The majority, however, and the best developed of my specimens of Lioc. opalinwm have been obtained from this hard rock above the so-called ‘‘ Cephalopoda-bed.” The hard rock must, therefore, be considered to belong to the Opalinwm-zone, and, by Dr. Wright’s system, that means to the Lias. He, however, considered it Inferior Oolite, in which opinion I fancy he would meet with full support. The Opalinum- zone must then be considered to be in the Inferior Oolite and not in the Lias, and the line of division between the Lias and the Oolite must be drawn at any rate below this zone. How much higher than Bed 15 the Opalinwm-zone may be considered to range, or how much more would have to be placed in the Lias if the zone were to stand part of that formation, is certainly a question not easily to be determined by the very scanty fauna (especially Ammonites) that has been obtained from the beds above. The zone may or may not include the ‘Sandy Ferruginous” beds,* D’, and the same may be said of the ‘“ Lower Limestone ” series, D”, but we know that it does not include the Pea-grit proper, which belongs, without doubt, to the Murchisone-zone. 1 The Cephalopoda-bed is considered to be the soft friable marl (beds 17, 18, 19, and perhaps part of 16, section V). Dr. Lycett, ‘ Cotteswold Hills,’ p. 20, says of it, ‘Its thickness at Haresfield Hill is not more than two feet, its colour is dark or chocolate-like, and it is so little compacted that it may be broken up by the hands alone.” * Compare Lycett, ‘ Cotteswold Hills,’ p. 27, and corrigenda, p. 164; also p. 163. 3 See ‘On the Pisolite and Basement-beds of the Inferior Oolite of the Cotteswolds,’ by E. Witchell, Esq., F.G.S. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 43 V. Generalised Section of the Escarpment of Haresfield Hill (six miles due south of Gloucester.) Ft. In. Pea- Grit E 1. Rubbly, whitish limestone with numerous flattened and irregular-shaped — pisolitic grains. Rhynchonella subangulata, Dav., Rh. oolitica, Dav. hampton. (abundant), Terebratula sub-mazillata, Dav., Tered. plicata, J. Buckm., Tereb, pisolitica, 8S. Buckm. . Pero aa) Lower ) D" 2. Several beds of limestone, varying in eolons from white to ats brown, ere with numerous very fine, round, oolite grains; discoloured in places Witchell. with iron. Sometimes containing, especially towards the upper part, fragments of shells and some coarser grains. Worked for rough masonry. At the base, but not separable, is an extremely shelly bed, about one foot thick, with numerous fragments of shells, Pentacrinites, Oysters, Polyzoa, spines of Cidaris, &e. . : about 25 0O 3. Dark brown sandy bed with some grey pebbles ooeaerinaite embedded . O 38 4. Blocks of limestone similar to No. 2, if anything somewhat finer in texture; discoloured a good deal with iron; containing sometimes small fragments of shells, and small, brown, irregular-shaped, decom- posed grains. Bored in places by Annelids. Worked for rough masonry . : 2 . : - 10 5. Grey limestone with some few irregular grains; not otldualle worked 6. Hard grey limestone with no oolite grains ;! a few iron stains 7. Soft, brown, gritty, sandy bed, without any oolite grains wa, | D’ 8.2 Compact grey limestone with coarse oolite grains, which are absent in oo w SOA wWo bo i=) Beds the upper part ; very little stained with iron (Witchell.) 9. Similar bed with somewhat finer grains, and rather more stained 10. Grey limestone with numerous brown grains, and many ferruginous patches. Much broken up, readily disintegrated by weather, and very brown when exposed. Lioceras ambiguum ? poorly preserved 11. Grey limestone with numerous irregular-shaped grains : 12. Grey limestone with numerous light grains and ferruginous patches 13. Rubbly parting ; : ; : 14. Grey limestone with numerous ferruginous patches and seneatat coarse H Noon jo) Oo ipa (S H On grains é A ; : : oe aeleaa C'” 15. Very hard limestone, varying in colour from a light greyish-yellow to a pPne. dark brown, with almost an approach to chestnut, containing very numerous and very small dark-brown grains. This stone is generally browner in patches where the fossils occur. Its generally rich colour gives it a totally different appearance to any of the other beds above or below. JZioceras opalinwm abundant and of large size; Lioc. comptum. 1 O 1 That is, to the naked eye in this and other cases. 2 Beds 8—14 are all very similar in character, and probably scarcely separable except that some are more readily decomposed by weather. When freshly broken up they are of an iron-grey colour, but soon became very brown on exposure, and hence when weathered are quite different in appearance from those above them. These beds contain grains of mica. 44. INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. Ft. In. 16.1 Hardish, less compact, yellow rock (softer below), with irony grains; very closely attached to bed 15. Lioc. opalinum, small size; Gramm. aalense, Ziet.; Trigonia Ramsayi, Lye. . : ; x NON C" 17. Yellow, softer, easily broken marl, with dark brown grains. Rhyncho- nella eynocephala, Rich., Gramm. Moorei, Lyc.; Lytoceras Wrighti, S. Buckman,? occurs in this bed and the bottom of the one above Or & 18. Dark brown seam with Rhynch. cynocephala abundant : . Ogls2 Striatu- ) C’ 19. Yellowish-brown marl, similar to No. 17, containing at the base a line of rae nodules embedded in it at irregular intervals. These nodules are similar to the stone occurring in the sands below, viz. bluish-grey, hard, sandy, micaceous stone, with no ferruginous grains. Tereb. hares- jieldensis, Day., occurs frequently throughout this bed, but more com- monly just above the nodules. Gramm. striatulum, Sow., occurs in fragments® ; ; ; ; : 5 Cottes- ) B 20. Greyish-yellow micaceous sands, extending down the hill perhaps 100 feet. or They are not exposed except in very small openings, and a few feet at i the top. About thirty feet from the bottom, from a band of sandy stone, fragments of a variety of Hildoceras bifrons were obtained . . 100? 0 A 21. Upper Lias Clay ? 0 10 1 Beds 17, 18, 19, and perhaps part of 16, are the Gloucestershire Cephalopoda-bed of various authors. Dr. Wright drew the line between Lias and Oolite either between 15 and 16 or 16 and 17. There is no lithological break between beds 15—19, except perhaps 18. They almost pass one into another. Bed 15, Mr. Witchell told me, he probably included in his Sandy Ferruginous Limestones. * Lytoceras Wrighti, new species, figured by Wright as Lytoceras jurense, ‘Monog. Lias Ammo- nites,’ pl. 79, 1884, but not the species so named by Zieten. 3 At Frocester Hill (called Coaley Peak in the Ordnance Survey Map) the well-known quarry does not show the whole of the beds so well, and one has now to obtain additional information from exposures in the near neighbourhood. The beds equivalent to 15, 16, 17, at Haresfield, both in lithology and paleontology, present exactly the same features except that the divisions between them are more marked. Between 15 and 16 the difference in lithology is very striking on a smooth face, and between 16 and 17 a slight band of marl is perceptible. The dark seam (18) does not contain Rhynch. cynocephala in noticeable abundance, it varies from 2—3 inches, and is certainly not persistent, as one exposure in the quarry does not show it at all, while the other a few yards beyond does so plainly. The bed below is considerably thicker than at Haresfield (19), being three feet. It is in a rather more marly condition than the bed above the seam, and contains Tereb. haresfieldensis in abundance, especially about the middle. Sometimes it inclines to a blue colour. Towards the lower part, which, however, I could not see well, a very dark bed occurs similar in character to bed 8 at Coaley and bed 14 at Nibley. At its base, and resting on the yellow sands, a line of blue- hearted sandy nodules is situated. (The yellow sands probably extend about 150 feet down the hill, but present no sections.) The above fossiliferous beds are very rich, especially in the upper part. Lioceras opalinum occurs exactly as at Haresfield. Lytoceras Wrighti occurs rather frequently and of large size in the beds equal to 16 and 17, both on the dark seam and at top of 16, and I have collected it and Lytoceras opalinum as close together as possible in the same lump of rock. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. VI.—Section exhibited at Coaley Wood (twelve miles from Gloucester south by west). 1. Large freestone quarry, above which are seen beds with Terebratula globata q : < ; 3 about D’ 2. Portion unseen. 3. Pale yellow stone with light coloured oolitic grains. . about Opali- ) C'” 4. Very hard, pale coloured, compact rock, with very small brown grains. Ee, Gives a metallic ring when struck. ioc. opalinum fairly abundant ; hardly any other fossils ‘ : : 5.1 Hardish oolitic rock, somewhat irregular, not so compact, yellow covet with more brown grains. ioc. opalinum, small Ohemnitzia, Belem- nites, &c. Striatu- ) C” 6. Rubbly oolitic ceealas stone pe 5, Hedy aopatatal from it, tat satin lum and mixed with marl. Am. torulosus? quantity of Belemnites and subzone. Astarte, also Opis, Cypricardia, and many other Lamellibranchiata. Lytoceras Wrighti,S. Buckm., occurs in this bed and the bottom of No. 5 7. Hard, compact, whitish-yellow stone, with darker grains. Gramm. falla- ciosum /,” Bayle; Oxynoticeras ? discoides, Zieten ; Hammatoceras insigne ? Schubler : . 8. A seam of brown rubbly marl, with numerous dark nena oolite grains ; looks like crushed linseed. Gramm. striatulum, Sow.; Gramm. radians, Wright (pl. lxiv, fig. 1) Cottes- | B”’ 9. Very hard, bluish-grey, sandy nodules, eanataed in a marly waste like pele | No. 8, of which it is really a part. Gramm. striatulum occurs some- Wasa. f times in the paste on the nodules, but never im them to my knowledge . bilis | 10. Hard, blue-centred stone subzone. ) 41. Fine, yellow, micaceous sands. ; . about 12. Brownish concretionary rock, very slightly micaceous, containmg dark oolitie grains and pieces of broken shells, has a similar appearance to bed 7, but harder. Some Ammonites, but scarce : 13. Two bands of hard yellowish-blue stone, somewhat sandy. Large Lime; Ammonites, &c. 14. Yellow sands, becoming blue in the lower aa 15. Dark, yellowish-brown, concretionary marl with Ammonites ; 16. Band of yellowish-blue, hard sandy stone. Ammonites fairly abundant, especially on the top; Haugia® variabilis, dOrb., and similar forms. Lytoceras sublineatum, Oppel; Stephanoceras, sp. ? Fine yellow sands Zone? B'17. Band of yellowish-blue hard oane with Eee bifrons,* Brug. abundant; Harp. ? compactile, Simpson . ’ : about Ft. 50 50 25 Ad oo : Beds 5—8, Cephalopoda-bed of various authors. 2 The identification of some of these Ammonites not yet freed from matrix must be considered provisional for the present. They will be alluded to later on in their right order. 3 Haugia, nov. gen., in compliment to Dr. E. Haug, of Strasburg ; type dm. variabilis, d’Orbigny, Ceph., pl. 113, figs. 1, 2. 4 This is a much compressed involute variety, and very different to what I have from the Upper Lias Clay of Somerset. 46 18. a Lo: INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. Yellow sands visible for some feet, and conjectured to extend down to the spring of water Upper Lias Clay ? Ft. 40 VII.—Section of Nibley Knoll (fifteen miles from Gloucester south by west). Parkinsoni ale zone, 2. 3. D'? 4, Opalinum Cl” 5. zone. 6. Cad: . Yellowish-grey clayey mar] : . Yellow marl, oolitic, somewhat concretionary ; . . Yellow and yellowish-grey marly shales, many dark oolitic grains . More concretionary marls with Ammonites . 12, Striatulum C’ 13. subzone. 14. 15. Cotteswold B’ 16. Sands. Variabilis subzone. 19. 20. 1G 18. . Band of blue-centred sandy stone. Lytoceras aybiheniare Oppel TRIGONIA-GRIT and rubble : : Pale-coloured freestone with oolitic grains mat toloured with iron; with dark brown bands occasionally : Freestone imperfectly shown : about Pale, somewhat sandy rock, very avehtly oolitic; imperfectly shown. Pholodamya fidicula, Trigonia striata, Astarte about Band of pale, slightly oolitic rock, irony grains Light yellow rubbly marl with irony grains. Lioc. opalinum, eu Band of rock. Rh. cynocephala, Rich. . Much the same as 10 5 : Hardish yellow oolitic rock. Gramm. striatulum, Sow. Schubler Dark brown oolitic re looks He erased insead. Wright (pl. lxiv, fig. 1) Hard, irregular rock, in two layers. ; Hamm, insigne, Gramm. radians, Gramm. striatulum abundant ; Lytoceras (of the jurense group) ; Fine yellow sands, harder at the top. Perhaps divided by soutednonies layers, but none such visible . : . about Yellowish-brown, coucretionary, sandy layer ; no fossils Hard, bluish-yellow, slightly eee rock, with Belemnites, Turbo, ieiben leya, Lima, &e. : ; 0 6 Fine yellow sands 4 ; : Yellow sandy stone; only one species of Abele which is small nid fairly abundant . Yellow sands . 5 . Band of yellow sandy stone . Yellow sands . . Band of yellow sandy stone . Yellow sands . . Band of yellow sandy stone - Yellow sands. . Band of blue-centred sandy stone; not well spose Harp. ? compactile, Simpson; Stephanoceras, Belemnites, &c. . Yellow sands. Harp. ? compactile, Simps. ; Haugia Ogerieni ? Dum.; Stephanoceras, &e. NopwrreooOorF @ wWoOonownonsd Oo In. 0 (=) SOoOanowmwvon © 10 CRON C BOS or) LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 47 Ft. In. 31. Blue and yellow sands, continuing down probably to where water is obtained in the village ; ; : : 30-35 0 A. 32. Upper Lias Clay ? VIII.— Section exhibited in the road at Stinchcombe (thirteen and a half miles from Gloucester suuth-south-west). This shows the junction of the Cotteswold Sands with the Upper Lias Clay, thus giving particulars which the other sections do not. As this section is about two miles north of Nibley it may well be taken as showing the base of those Sands exhibited in the last secticn. Cotteswold 1. Yellow sands which break up in small rectangular lumps, extending up Sands. the hill : : : " : : 2. Very dark brown argillaceous marl, containing Hildoceras bifrons, Brug., in abundance; Harp.? compactile, Simps.; Belemnites, &c. . of Oey 3. Brownish and sometimes bluish, shelly, somewhat sandy stone, with plenty of small ferruginous specks (top part very uneven and filled with the bed above). Hild. bifrons, Stephanoceras, Rhynchonella, Terebratula, &e. : ; ; : : ; « FOLSS Upp. Lias A. 4. Dark blue clay without fossils, containing large blue-hearted nodules of Clay. stone, which break with a conchoidal fracture and are non-oolitic IX.—Section at Burton-Bradstock Cliff, Dorset, partly taken from Mr. Hudleston’s ‘ Gasteropoda,’ Pal. Soc. (vol. for year 1886, p. 31). “1. Line of irony nodules, Gasteropoda, Am. Murchisone : a lass 2. Impure limestone with few fossils : < ; £) Gs C’. 3. Brash and rock with Am. opalinus, Gasteropoda ; ‘ s (20873 C". 4. Calciferous grits and brown sand-rock of the Yeovil Sands.” [‘‘ Above the main mass of the ‘ Yeovil Sands’ there occur about seven feet of sand-rock and calciferous grits between two lines of very thin, smooth, sharply-keeled Ammonites (op. cit., page 30).”] . iO B. 5. Main mass of Yeovil Sands extending, as I know, to a depth of 150 or 200 feet, and containing concretionary nodules, and, in other as if not here, shelly beds 6. Upper Lias Clay containing, in other sdncee near, Hila. bifrons ai oie characteristic Ammonites Part of a General Section of the Oolitic Beds in the Northampton District, extracted from a paper: by the late Mr. S. Sharp, F.G.S., §c., p. 358. Great OOLITE. Line of unconformity. ¢ 1. White or grey sand, more or less coherent, and with occasional ferru- ginous stains, sometimes quarried for building stone. A plant bed is usually found in this sand : F ; : ~ 27 8 1 “The Oolites of Northamptonshire,” ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xxvi, 1870, pp. 854—391 See this for further details. A8 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. Ft. In. A series of very variable beds, composed sometimes of ferruginous sand- Z stone in thin layers which overlie calcareous beds containing shelly zones, 7) £ | false-bedding being frequent; sometimes the whole section consists of 8 S calcareous rock with false-bedding, sometimes it presents a series of a 84 beds of compact ferruginous sandstone, with no fossils. In one a i) | instance, the entire section consists of white sand and sandstone, with = 5 | no fossils . : « 30.70 2a. Coarse oolitic, or Auisceretaline limestone with fossils, Same a calcareo-arenaceous slate like Collyweston Slate. : of, Aen 3. Beds, chiefly consisting of ironstone, containing Rhynchonella variabilis, L and R. cynocephala ; and Ammonites bifrons! at the base ; sweojag Upper Lias Clay. Part of the Beds No. 3 in the above section are more fully given by Mr. Sharpe at p- 370, as below. Part of Section of Old Duston Stonepit, using Quarrymen’s Terms. 1. “The Yellow” building stone, consisting of six or seven beds of varying thickness, in two divisions, differing somewhat in tone of colour. These beds contain “ pot-lids ” of ironstone; also Cardiwm cognatum, &c. . 6-700 2. “Best Brown Hard” building stone in three or four beds,—a coarser, stronger stone than that of the other beds, but of a rich red-brown colour; it contains few fossils . A ‘ : 6 0 C’” 3. ‘Rough Rag,” a slightly calcareous sandstone, green-hearted, hard, and durable, used for copings, gravestones, and buildings. It contains Ammonites Murchisone,? A. opalinus, Nautilus, Ceromya bajociana, Pholadomya fidicula, Cardium cognatum, Cucullea, &c., and a charac- teristic zone of Astarte elegans : 3 0 4. “Hard Blue,” a very hard blue-hearted stone, the eee of the joints and bedding brown from oxidation. It contains the same fossils as the last bed excepting Ammonites Murchisone and the Astarte elegans zone 3-4 0 5. The presence of water prevents the working of the stone in this pit to a lower depth, but in an old disused pit in an adjoining field the beds for about three feet lower are exposed, and these consist of cellular ironstone, having sometimes green arenaceous, and sometimes ochreous cores . 3 O ‘ The occurrence of Am. bifrons is interesting to note when compared with the foregoing sections of the Cotteswold Sands in Gloucestershire, Nos. V, VI, VIII. Mr. Thompson thinks the specimens have come from Upper Lias nodules; but this is not the case in the Cotteswolds. * It must be understood that the list of species here given are merely copied from Mr. Sharpe’s paper, and rest on his authority. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. AQ An analysis of the Cotteswold sections shows us that, while the beds which actually contain Lioc. opalinwm do not vary so very greatly, yet the thickness of what is called the Cephalopoda-bed increases very much at North Nibley. This we see chiefly occurs in the middle part, or the beds lying between those below in which I have noted Gramm. striatulwm and those above with Loc. opalinwm, and there is also a certain increase in the beds with Gramm. striatulum. Calling these horizons C’’, C’, C’, the result may be stated in a tabular form, thus : Haresfield. Coaley Wood. North Nibley. Ft. In. Ft. In. Ft. In. Ce aseees 1 4 Je 1 10 ae etl UY Bae aae 0 8 sic 0 8 Sa 10 10 (OS weer 0 10 1 Py ts) Total ... 2 10 ede 3 Ge 15 6! C0’, as I have said, are the beds where Lioc. opalinum actually occurs in the Cotteswolds, while C” are the beds below, in which I have not detected it though I have found in them a somewhat similar, but I believe generically different, Ammonite. If we use the name “‘ Zone of Am. opalinus” it would seem correct to place C”” and C” in that zone, and, as I have previously remarked, the upward extension of the zone is a matter of uncertainty. It is, however, well to consider that Oppel’ makes two zones, the one of Trigonia navis and the other of Am. toru- losus, and states that Am. opalinus occurs throughout both zones (pp. 297, 367). Perhaps C” and part of the “Sandy Ferruginous” beds D’ may be respectively the zones of Am. torulosus and Trigonia navis, and C” should be parted between them. CO’, or the lower part of the Cephalopoda-bed in Gloucester- shire, | have provisionally called the Striatulwm-subzone because of the presence of Ammonites striatulus so abundantly in the beds which directly overlie the yellow micaceous Cotteswold Sands that are lithologically so different. From Hares- field Beacon to Little Sodbury, a distance of nearly seventeen miles direct, I have found this Ammonite always in this position. Oppel,’ when treating of Frocester Hill, places beds of this horizon (7. e. lying on the top of the Yellow Sands) in the zone of Am. jurensis, a species which has hitherto, I think, been ' This is the greatest development of the “ Cephalopoda-bed” which I know, viz. fifteen feet six inches. Dr. Wright, on the authority of Sir A. C. Ramsay, states (‘ Monogr. Lias’Ammon.,’ p- 95) that at Wotton-under-Edge the series is sixteen feet thick. With my late friend Mr. E. Witchell I tested this point by actual measurement, and found it to be only eleven feet. In other respects the section agrees with North Nibley. * Oppel, ‘Juraformation,’ pp. 293 and 305; and at p. 321 he states that these two zones sometimes attain a thickness of 300 feet in the Swabian Alps. 3 Oppel, op. cit., p. 296. 50 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. incorrectly identified (so far as British figures are concerned), and which I have not yet obtained. Its claim to rank as a British species being somewhat doubtful, and the actual extent of the beds which may be equivalent to the Continental ‘‘ Zone of Am. jwrensis”’ being uncertain, | have preferred to use the term ‘ Striatulum- subzone ”’ to denote the beds which in the Cotteswolds overlie the Yellow Sands and form the lower part of the Cephalopoda-bed. When thoroughly developed the subzone consists of two or more bands of hard stone with a dark brown marly layer between, and contains certain characteristic Ammonites, among which is Gramm. striatulum (p. 46). The thickness of the Cotteswold Sands in the Gloucestershire sections is of necessity partly an estimate which gives them an average of 100—125 feet at these localities. Oppel’ places these sands at Frocester in the upper part of the zone of Posidonomya Bronni, the “hard blue beds with Am. bifrons and Am. serpentinus”’ forming the lower portion. I have preferred to distinguish for the present their greater portion at least as the Variabilis-subzone, since this Ammomite occurs in almost the first fossiliferous band below the Striatuluwm-beds. But the presence of Hildoceras bifrons abundantly in these sands at least forty feet from their base,” and also at the base itself above the blue clay,® makes it extremely hard to draw any line of demarcation between the Variabilis-subzone and the zone of Hild. bifrons. H. B. Woodward,‘ using the term ‘‘ Midford Sands ’’ in its widest sense to include the Yeovil and Cotteswold Sands as well as those at Midford, states that they contain the zones of Am. opalinus and Am. jurensis,° and places the whole series in the Lower Oolites away from the Lias; but, as regards the latter, this occurrence of MHildoceras bifrons must be somewhat hard to explain. These sands, by whatever name they are called, are very puzzling to correlate with any degree of certainty; and I feel some doubts about the propriety of using the term ‘‘ Midford Sands” for the whole series in the three counties of Dorset, Somerset, and Gloucester until we have obtained further 1 Oppel, op. cit., p. 296. 2 Sections V, VI. 3 Section VIII. 4 * Geology of England and Wales,’ 2nd edition, p. 285, 1887. 5 I expressed this opinion with regard to the zones of the Yeovil Sands (‘‘ Amm. Inf. Ool.,”’ ‘Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xxxvii, p. 608, 1881), and Oppel’s statement that at Ilminster the Sands of the Inferior Oolite begin above a bed filled with Am. jurensis, radians, variabilis, &c., partly helped to form it (‘ Juraf.,’ p. 253). Now I know that my determination of Lytoc. jwrense was incorrect, and having since seen the much clearer exposures of the Cotteswold Sands and Cephalo- poda-bed, both containing a far better Ammonite fauna, I feel considerable doubts about the matter, and shall be far from satisfied about the correlation of the Yeovil Sands with the Cotteswold Sands and Cephalopoda-bed without working the subject up more fully in Dorset. The general identity of the deposits is probable, but their exact correlation is the difficulty. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 51 knowledge. According to Oppel neither the zone of Juwrensis nor of Opalinus occurs in the Cotteswold Sands. He places the lower part of the Cephalopoda-bed in the zone of Am. jurensis, and he claims the Sands as the upper part of the zone of Posidonomya Bronni. If the term ‘‘ Midford Sands ”’ is to include the Opalinum-zone, it must be taken to be equivalent not to the Cotteswold Sands alone but to the Cephalopoda-bed as well, and may in that case even include a considerable part of the ‘‘ Sandy Ferruginous ”’ beds, which would be an anomalous state of things. According to Mr. Hudleston’ there is no trace of the fauna of the Cephalopoda-bed of Gloucestershire in the Midford Sands themselves at Midford, and therefore I think that it would be unwise to use the term so as to include that deposit. My idea would rather be to place some name on the Sands occurring in the three Counties that would signify the horizon equivalent only to what lies between the Upper Lias Clays below and the Striatulum-beds above, equal in fact to the Cotteswold Sands, but not to include the lithologically very different strata of the Gloucestershire Cephalopoda-bed in the term Sands. It may be that the Midford Sands are equivalent either to the Cotteswold Sands only, or to those Sands and more. Inthe former case the term would do, but the proper zonal constituents would have to be determined ; in the latter case I think that it would be preferable to use some other name to indicate the Sands alone in other counties.’ As will be seen from the extract from Mr. Hudleston’s section given at p. 47, a bed only three inches thick containing Loc. opalinum occurs at the base of the Inferior Oolite Limestone at Burton Bradstock. This bed I take to be the exact equivalent of the one at Haresfield, above the Cephalopoda-bed, viz. No. 15, and there are at Burton Bradstock some seven feet of sandy grits just underneath, which must be reckoned to the lower part of the Opalinwm-zone, and from which probably my specimens of Lytoceras toruloswm, Schibler, were obtained. Otley Hill, near Hook Norton, Oxfordshire, [ have through his kindness seen specimens of Lioceras 1 At Yeovil, Bradford Abbas, &c., there seems to be no trace of the Opalinum-beds, and, therefore, the whole of the sands there may be below that horizon. 2 This locality is sometimes called “ New Duston” on account of some new houses that have sprung up round the old workings. 3 “On the Trigonie of North Oxfordshire,” ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xli, 1885, p. 38. LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 53 opalinum. This bed is called by him a “sandy blue-hearted limestone.” Both Mr. Walford and Mr. Sharpe quote Am. Murchisone from the same bed as Am. opalinus, but Mr. Walford informs me that he somewhat doubts this identification, as well as that of Am. leviusculus which he gives, and I expect that the same must be said of Mr. Sharpe’s. The Lioceras opalinum at Hook Norton was associated with a species of Hammatoceras (?), which Mr. Thompson also sent me from New Duston, and which also occurs with Loc. opalinum at Burton Bradstock, so that probably there can be little doubt of the identity of this horizon (the Opalinwm- zone) throughout these Counties. I have thus gone somewhat fully into the position of Lioceras opalinum, first because paleontological details are very insufficient unless accompanied, wherever possible, with the full geological conclusions to which they lead us, especially in the case of Ammonites, which have been used to designate the zones; secondly, the zone of Lvoceras opalinum is more persistent and more recognisable than perhaps any other in the Inferior Oolite; and, thirdly, because, lying as it does at or near the base of the Inferior Oolite, it is a most useful geological landmark that ought to be fully established. I have verified its occurrence in the Counties of Dorset, Gloucester, Oxford, and Northampton by an examination of specimens of the characteristic Ammonites. LIocERAS OPALINUM, var. compruM (feinecke). Pl. XIII, fig. 11; Pl. XIV, figs. 3, A, 5, 6. (Pl. XIII, fig. 12; Pl. XIV, figs. 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 doubtful forms). 1818. Navritvus comerus, Reinecke. Maris Protog., figs. 5, 6. 1884. Harrocreras opatinum, Wright. Lias Ammonites, Pal. Soc., pl. 80, fig. 4. 1885. — comptum, Haug. Beitrige Monog. Harpoceras, Neues Jahr- buch, Beil.-Bd. iii, p. 681. 1886. — opaLinum, Vacek. Oolithe Cap San Vigilio, Abh. der k. k. geol. Reichsanstalt, Wien, Bd. xii, No. 3, pl. vi, figs. 6, 7, 13, only. 1886. — ? Murcuisonm, Vacek (non Sowerby). Ibid., Pl. vii, fig. 5. It is rather difficult from a mere examination of Reinecke’s figure of Nautilus comptus to say what it may be, and the identification should be regarded only as the most probable until reference can be made to the original specimen if it exists. That there is very great similarity between the little specimen, Pl. XIII, fig. 11, and Reinecke’s original figure, cannot, I think, be denied. Dr. Haug con- siders that what Dr. Wright figured as Lioc. opalinwm with fascicled ribs (loc. cit.) is the adult form; but Dr. Wright placed Nautilus comptus as a synonym of 54, INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. his Harpoceras aalense with a query. Dr. Vacek, page 72, states that he con- siders that a number of specimens of Harp. opalinwm from Cap San Vigilio belong to Haug’s Harp. opalinum, var. comptum, especially pl. vi, figs. 15 and 16. Having some doubt, however, with respect to these figures, I have not included them in my synonymy ; and in fact I am somewhat doubtful if they should be included in Lioceras at all. Vacek’s figures 6, 7, and 13 on pl. vi I recognise as the varietal form comptum, and I am inclined to think that fig. 5, pl. vii, is very closely allied. From Ivoceras opalinum this variety differs chiefly in the form of ribbing. The striz are not actually fascicled, but the mner portion of the sides of the whorl are periodically bulged in the direction of the striz, and these striz pass continuously over these bulgings which have, when the test is absent, all the appearance of regular ribs, and give to the umbilicus the appearance of being ribbed. The umbilicus is also larger than in Lioc. opalinum, and the walls are much straighter. The sides of the whorls are more parallel and not so depressed on the inner area. When the test is absent this variety has a slight resemblance in its ribbing to Ludwigia Murchisone, but the number of fine striz in connection with a rib or bulge on the inner area shows the difference. ‘This form also somewhat resembles Gramm. aalense (Zieten), but the fine striz again distinguish it from the coarse, irregularly-joined ribs of that species ; the possession too of a concave inner margin is a distinction, not to mention the difference of the sutures. I have little doubt that this variety was partly concerned with Dr. Lycett’s ideas about the various Ammonites opalinus, aalensis, comptus, &c. He found a most complex state of things, namely, Lioc. opalinwm with very fine striz, Gramm. Moorei the same, and with traces of coarser ribs in the centre, ioc. comptum with (when the test is absent) coarse ribs on the inner area and centre, and Gramm. aalense with coarse ribs; and, perhaps noticing the similarity between Inoc. opalinum and comptum, he united them but could find no strong reason for separating Gramm. Moorei from Gramm. aalense, or from Lioc. opalinum. By pointing out, later on, the descent or evolution of these various Ammonite-forms, I hope to be able to show that, in spite of a rather deceptive outward appearance, these Ammonites are really somewhat widely separated, and that those ideas partly arose because the real importance of certain characteristics was not fully appreciated. ° I have not so much material belonging to this variety as I could wish. A more extended series would show better both the connection and distinction between the forms with these waves or false ribs and the true Lioc. opalinum. We have, how- ever, first what I imagine to be Reinecke’s comptus, Pl. XIII, fig. 11, somewhat LIOCERAS OPALINUM. 55 larger, Pl. XIV, figs.3 and 4, and an adult figured by Dr. Wright, ‘Lias Am.,’ pl. Ixxx, fig. 4; secondly, a form showing slightly a wider umbilicus, and seeming to commence with coarser ribs, but as the test is not well preserved little can be said on this point (Pl. xiv, figs. 5, 6); thirdly, forms which seem to be connected with Inoc. opalinum and which in general proportions of umbilicus, &c., agree exactly with that species, but have some tendency to show these waves or false ribs. Pl. XIV (fig. 1 only) gives a side view which may pass for such a form, and which represents those of which I am speaking except that they are thinner. Pl. XIII, fig. 12, shows a portion of one of them with the commencement of the lateral process of the mouth-border. Then lastly d’Orbigny has figured a thicker form (‘ Pal. franc. Ceph.,’ pl. lxu, figs. 1 and 2) under the name Am. primordialis, not yet obtained by me. The specimen figured Pl. XIV, figs. 1] and 2, resembles it in thickness, but has a much smaller umbilicus. This may possibly be the young of a peculiar form, of which I have given a figure in the hope that more may be procured (PI. XIV, figs. 7,8, and 9). This form commences with fine strize, and slight indications of waves, which afterwards change to somewhat coarse ribs. It is certainly considerably different from either Lioc. opalinwm or comptum. Lioc. comptum is not a common form. It occurs in the same bed with Lioc. opalinum. 1 possess specimens from Haresfield Hill and North Nibley in Gloucestershire. From Somerset I have one specimen, not well preserved, labelled ‘“‘ Haselbury.” In Dorset I have obtained a few small specimens at Burton Bradstock.' The kindness of Mr. B. Thompson, F.G.8., has enabled me to examine two very good specimens of this variety from New Duston in North- amptonshire collected by himself and Mr. W. D. Crick from what is there known as the Northampton Sand. Unfortunately these arrived too late to be included in the plates. The intermediate forms I have obtained from Burton Bradstock, Dorset, and from Stinchcombe Hill, Gloucestershire. Pl. XIII, fig. 11, shows a young specimen of Reinecke’s form. This will serve for comparison with his figure and also with the specimen, fig. 6, of a young Iioc. opalinum. On account of the absence of the test its ribs appear much coarser than they otherwise would. Pl. XIV, figs. 3, 4, represent an older specimen of the same form, with a large portion of the test well preserved. Both these specimens are from Burton Bradstock. Pl. XIV, figs. 5, 6, represent another form not well preserved, but useful for comparison with the other two placed by the side of it. This is from Haresfield Hill, Gloucestershire. Pl. XIII, fig. 12, shows a portion of one of the forms intermediate between Lioc. comptuwm and opalinum, showing the commencement of the termination. Pl. XIV, figs. 1, 2, indicate a thick form with small umbilicus and rather sharp cara. ‘The test is 1 At this place I have also obtained some specimens which seem to agree with Vacek’s, pl. vi, figs. 15 and 16, but which I think do not belong here. The material, however, is as yet insufficient. 56 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. very well preserved. Both these specimens are from Burton Bradstock. Pl. XIV, fig. 7, gives the side view of a specimen which is difficult to place with either Lioc. opalinum or comptwm without further evidence. It shows a very distinct change in the nature of its ribbing. It came from the same bed at Haresfield Hill in which voc. opalinwm occurs plentifully. Its test is fairly well preserved. Fig. 8 shows its thickness and fairly sharp carina; fig. 9 shows the carina and ventral area a little farther back than the top of fig. 8, which is broken off. Lioceras concavum (Sowerby). Plate II, figs. 6, 7; Plate VIII, figs. 1—4. 1815. AmmMonirEs concavus, Sowerby. Min. Conch., vol. i, pl. 94, lower figure p. 214. 1881. Harpoceras concavum, S. Buck. Ammon. Inf. Ool. Dorset, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxxvii, p- 603. 1885. _ — Haug. Beitr. Monog. Harpoceras, Neues Jahr- buch, Beil.-Bd. iii, pl. 12, figs. 12 a, b (a variety). (Non Ammonites concavus, d’Orbigny, Dumortier, &c.) Discoidal, compressed, sub-carinate. Whorls sub-convex, but with the inner margin slightly raised, causing the mner area to be slightly depressed and sub- concave, ornamented with sigmoidal radii, which, beginning as mere lines of growth, and so continuing across the inner area, become rather broad, but not prominent ribs on the outer area. The ribs then die away rather quickly at the edge of the ventral area, and, continuing as strive, can be traced across the carina, upon which they unite at an acute angle. Ventral area acutely sloped, with the carina, though prominent, not really distinct, but as if formed by the compression of the sides of the ventral area. Inner margin concave, and inclined at about an angle of 60°. Inciusion almost to the upper edge of the inner margin of the previous whorl, forming a small, almost regularly concave, umbilicus. The termination of the body-chamber is sigmoidal,’ generally quite plain when the test is present, but, with one or more constrictions, visible on the mould, caused by a thickening of the test ; the length of the body-chamber is exactly half a whorl.’ I have here purposely confined myself to a description of the typical form of this species, which I have been able to identify by an actual comparison of Sowerby’s type-specimen with my own, and this type-specimen of Sowerby’s I ' No elongated lateral processes are visible at a diameter of three inches, but they probably occur at an earlier age. 2 These characters of the body-chamber are shown by a specimen which I have not thought it necessary to figure. e? ¢ © £ 5 Aer it =). 7 yy “- r ; i ie qo wl ae es soit ha anny: “onntllc PLATE Vade Murchisone-zone. Figs. 1—6.—Liocrras ampicuum, 8. Buckman. Fig. 1.—Side view of a fine, well-preserved specimen, showing the small striz and indications of ribs, as well as the sudden recession of the inner margin. Bradford Abbas, Dorset, Collected by my father. (Page 26.) Fig. 2.—The same specimen, showing the front view. Fig. 3.—A portion of another specimen to show the side view of the termina- tion. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My Collection. (Page 27.) Fig. 4.—View (from above) of the termination of this specimen, showing the rounded ventral process. [A very slight carina should have been indicated along the middle. | Fig. 5.—Side view of a young specimen, possessing nearly the whole of the body- chamber, and thus showing a large umbilicus. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My Collection. (Page 27.) Fig. 6.—Front view of the same specimen. LiocErRas AMBIGUUM, var. costatuM, S. Buckman. Fig. 7.—Side view of a fine specimen, with all its test preserved and part of the termination of the body-chamber visible, showing numerous peculiar ribs which characterise this variety, and a smaller umbilicus. Haselbury, Somerset. My Collection. (Page 29.) 1 In Plates V1I and onwards all the specimens are figured of the natural size unless otherwise stated. Gawan del ct lith. Be PLATE VII. Mintern Bros . mp. ¢ PLATE VIII. Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). LIocERAS ConcAvuM (Sowerby). Fig. 1.—Side view of a typical adult specimen with greater portion of the test well preserved. The cross shows the last suture-line. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. Collected by my father. (Page 56.) Fig. 2.—Front view of the same, showing acutely sloped ventral area. Fig. 3.—A finer ribbed specimen, at an earlier age. Side view. Entire test most perfect. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My Collection. Fig. 4.—Front view of the same. Fig. 5.—A very peculiar variety, with extremely fine strie, and small deep umbilicus. All the test present, and the mouth-border. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My Collection. Fig. 6.—Outline of the ventral area, and the body-chamber of the same specimen, to show small amount of carina. Fig. 7.—Another peculiar variety, with indications of small knobs on the lateral area. All the test preserved. Very straight mouth-border. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My Collection. Fig. 8.—Outline of the ventral area of the body-chamber of the same specimen, showing that it is more acute, and has more carina than in Fig. 6. \. Gawan del. et lith. Mintern Bros. imp. AY ay eae mapas meabin Bte f y itt of PLATE IX. Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). Figs. 1—7.—Lioceras concavum, var. v-scriprum, S. Buckman. Fig. 1.—A fine adult form, showing small hollow umbilicus, and complete mouth-border. The test is well preserved. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. Collected by my father. Fig, 2.—Front view of the same specimen. Fig. 3.—View of the other side of the same specimen, where the test is absent, showing the ridges and furrows produced by the varying thickness of the test. This view of the same specimen was figured by my father in the ‘ Quart. Journal of the Geological Society,’ 1881. Fig. 4.—Suture-lines of the specimen in situ, showing part of siphonal, and superior and inferior lateral lobes, and siphonal and superior lateral saddles with the accessory lobes in them, and also the manner in which the previous lobes are penetrated by those succeeding. The cross shows the position of the last suture-line, indicating a body-chamber of exactly half a whorl. Fig. 5.—A front view of a young specimen. The carina is, if anything, rather too distinct. Fig. 6.—Side view of the same specimen with nearly all the test preserved. This is a young immature form, with a somewhat smaller umbilicus, and is in reality the young of the specimen figured in Plate VI. (The carina seems a little too prominent.) Bradford Abbas, Dorset. Collected by my father. Fig. 7.—Side view of a small shell, showing the small pointed lateral process, also the less inclusion of the whorls in youth. ‘The greater portion of the test is preserved. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My Collection. Figs. 8—10.—Litocrras concavum (Sowerby) ; abnormal form. Fig. 8.—Side view showing regular whorls and umbilicus. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. Collected by my father. Fig. 9.—View of the other side of the same specimen, showing abnormally formed whorls and umbilicus, and with indentations on the inner area of whorl. Fig. 10.—Front view of the same specimen, showing one side with regular concave inner margin, the other shorter and without any. The test is entirely preserved in this specimen. PLATE (ik. A.Gawan del et. lith Mmtern Bros. imp. PLATE X. Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). Figs. 1, 2.— Lioceras concavom, var. Formosum, S. Buckman. Fig. 1.—Side view of a very fine adult specimen, with extremely well-preserved test and beautifully complete mouth-border. (The ribs are shown somewhat too conspicuous.) Bradford Abbas, Dorset. Collected and lent for figuring by the late Mr. EH. Witchell, F.G.S.; and kindly presented to me by Mrs. Witchell. Fig. 2.—Front view of the same specimen, showing acute ventral area and compression of the inner area. Figs. 8, 4.—Liocnras concavum (Sowerby) variety. Fig. 3.—Side view of a specimen with small hollow umbilicus, showing the mouth-border. The test on the specimen is well preserved, especially on the ventral area. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My collection. Fig. 4.—Back view of the same specimen showing ventral area and carina. Figs. 5—8.—LioceRas coNncavum, var. v-scriptum, S. Buckman. Fig. 5.—The thick form of this variety. Side view, showing the change from v-shaped to sigmoidal ribs. Probably from Bradford Abbas, Dorset. Collected by my father. Fig. 6.—Front view of the same specimen, showing its thicker proportions and practically absent carina. Where the whorls enter the aperture the carina is shown too acute. Fig. 7.—A young form of the specimen figured Plate IX, fig. 1. Side view, showing v-shaped ribs. To compare with fig. 10. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. My collection. Fig. 8.—Front view of the same specimen. Fig. 9.—Lioceras concavum (Sowerby) variety. Fig. 9.—A portion of the side view of a peculiar form, intermediate between this and Lioceras v-scriptum, showing strongly-marked ribs on the middle of the lateral area. Bradford Abbas, Dorset. Collected by my father. Figs. 10, 11.—Liocreras aprertum, S. Buckman. Fig. 10.—Side view of the type specimen, showing the open umbilicus. Brad- ford Abbas, Dorset. Collected and lent for figuring by the late Mr. EH. Witchell F.G.S.; and kindly presented to me by Mrs. Witchell. Fig. 11.—Front view of the same, showing compressed parallel sides and almost absent carina. A Gawax ~ atee pty PLATE XI. Murchisone-zone. Fig. 1.—LI0cERAS BRADFOKDENSE, var. GIGANTEUM, S. Buckman. Fig. 1.—Side view of a large adult specimen, showing the small deep umbilicus and the smooth test when adult. The cross shows the position of the last suture-line. From Beaminster, Dorset. My Collection. (Page 25.) Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). Figs. 2—7.— LiochRAS DECIPIENS, var. INTERMEDIUM, S. Buckman. Fig. 2.—Side view of a specimen with the whole test very well preserved. Bradford Abbas. Collected by my father. (Page 33.) Fig. 3.—Front view of the same. No part of the body-chamber is present. Fig. 4.—Side view of the more compressed sub-variety A, showing absence of ribs in the umbilicus. The test is extremely well preserved. Bradford Abbas. My Collection. (Page 33.) Fig. 5.—Front view of the same specimen. Vig. 6.—Side view of the sub-variety B, showing more marked ribs on outer area and larger umbilicus than that in Fig. 2. Bradford Abbas. My Collection. (Page 33.) Fig. 7.—Front view of the same specimen. A. Gavan del.et lith ve eee as eae Sait Oa q f Mintern Bros imp aA Mn i y ‘ i : ’ ~ a é oor. a r4 b ae = ae j a 2 a ¢ ay iy . ¢ . 5 i ai / Sa) fi wy 4 4 ‘ - i wey F% u ‘ PLATE XII. Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). Figs. 1—3.—Lioceras concavum, var. pincun, S. Buckman. Fig. 1.—Side view of a specimen with part of the termination to the body- chamber. The test is well preserved. Halfway House, near Sherborne, Dorset. My Collection. Fig. 2.—Front view of the same specimen. Fig. 3.—A sectional view of the hollow umbilicus of the same specimen (to compare with Fig. 7). Murchisone-zone. Figs. 4—7.—LI0vERAS BRADFORDENSE, var. GiGaNTeuM, S. Buckman. Fig. 4.—Front view of the specimen drawn on Plate XI, fig. 1. The test covers the whole of the ventral area shown, and is also seen at the top of the figure. Natural size. (Page 25.) Fig. 5.—Side view of a young specimen with all its test well preserved. Stoke Knap, near Broad Windsor, Dorset. My Collection. (Page 25.) Fig. 6.—Front view of the same specimen. Fig. 7.—Sectional view of the umbilicus of the same specimen, showing the edges of the inner whorls (to compare with Fig. 3). Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). Figs. 8, 9.—Liocnras prciprens, S. Buckman. Fig. 8.—Side view of a large specimen showing very smooth test, which is well preserved, and part of the termination of the body-chamber. (The shell on the body-chamber has been drawn from what exists on the other side.) The cross shows the situation of the last suture-line. From near Sherborne, Dorset. Col- lected by my father. (Page 30.) Fig. 9.—Front view of the same specimen, showing flat ventral area and small but distinct carina. LIocERAS DECIPIENS, var. INTERMEDIUM P Fig. 10.—Side view of a doubtful form, with more prominent inner cost (to compare with Inoceras decipiens, Lioc. intermedium, and Hyperlioceras Walker‘). (Page 34.) PLATE XQ. aye Seis h Gawan del. et lit A PLATE XIE Opalinum-zone. Figs. 1—10.—Liocuras opaninum (einecke). Fig. 1—Side view of a typical large specimen, with almost the whole of the body-chamber present, and with the test extremely well preserved. Haresfield Hill, Gloucestershire. My Collection. (Page 35.) Fig. 2.—Front view of the same specimen, showing the almost complete absence of a carina, and also the rounded ventral area of the body-chamber. Fig. 3.—Side view of a portion of a large specimen, five and a half inches in diameter, to show the termination to the body-chamber. MHaresfield Hill. My Collection. (Page 36.) Fig. 4.—Side view of a small typical specimen (to compare with Reinecke’s figure). Coaley Wood, Gloucestershire. My collection. (Page 36.) Fig. 5.—Front view of the same specimen, showing that the carina is slightly more developed in youth. Fig. 6.—Side view of a very small specimen. Burton Bradstock, Dorset. My Collection. (Page 36.) Fig. 7. Side view of a somewhat compressed variety with wider umbilicus and more sloping inner margin. Only a portion of the body-chamber is present, as shown by the X. MHaresfield Hill. My Collection. (Page 39.) Fig. 8.—Front view of the same specimen. The upper portion of the last whorl has the test off, and shows a peculiarly compressed section. Fig. 9.—Side view of a younger specimen of the more widely centred variety. Haresfield Hill. My Collection. (Page 39.) Fig. 10.—Front view of the same. LIocERAS OPALINUM, vas. compruM (Reinecke). Fig. 11.—Side view of a very young specimen (to compare with Reinecke’s figure, and also with fig. 6). The test is absent and the stria are consequently more prominent. Burton Bradstock. My Collection. (Page 55.) INTERMEDIATE FORM. Fig. 12.—Portion of a variety between Lioc. opalinum and comptum, showing the commencement of the lateral process to the termination, which the young shells possess. Burton Bradstock. My Collection. (Page 54.) PLATE Xill. Mintern Bros . imp A. Gawan del. et lith PLATE XIV. Opalinum-zone. Figs. 1—6 (1 and 2 F).—Liocrras oPpaLinum, var. comprum (Reinecke). Fig. 1.—Side view of a thick, small-centred specimen with some characters of both Lioc. opalinum and comptum, but differing from either of them. Burton Bradstock. My Collection. (Page 55). Fig. 2.—Front view, showing its thickness and prominent carina. Fig. 3.—Side view of a true form with part of test extremely well preserved. Burton Bradstock. My Collection. (Page 55.) Fig. 4.—Front view of the same specimen. Fig. 5.—Side view of a more widely centred variety. Haresfield Hill. My Collection. (Page 54.) Fig. 6.—Front view of the same specimen. Figs. 7—9.—Lioogras, sp. ? Fig. 7.—Side view of a specimen with well-preserved test, showing a change from striz to coarser ribs. Haresfield Beacon. My Collection. (Page 53.) Fig. 8.—Front view of the same specimen, the inner margin is drawn some- what too much sloped. Fig. 9.—(To supplement fig. 8, which is broken.) Taken from a little further back to show the ventral area and carina accurately in section. Sowerbyi-zone (Concavum-beds). Figs. 10, 11.—Lioceras ratuax, S. Buckman. Fig. 10.—Side view of a large specimen, with greater portion of the test present, showing the umbilicus, with portions of the inner whorls exposed. Brad- ford Abbas, Dorset. Collected by my father. Fig. 11.—Front view of the same specimen, showing the ventral area and carina, both with and without test. PLATE XIV. A. Gawan del. et th Mintern Bros. imp.