Mr. W. V. Guise on a new species of Alpheus. 53 



Hailstone, which certainly agrees far more nearly with my ex- 

 ample than do either of those to which I have already referred ; 

 so nearly indeed, that but little doubt remains upon my mind of 

 its being identically the same. This species, which Mr. Hail- 

 stone calls " Hippolyte rubra" and of which a figure is annexed, 

 is thus described : 



"Superior antennae with two setae, the upper ones fringed 

 with hair and excavated below. Inferior antennae nearly the 

 length of the body. Pedipalps with three exserted joints, the 

 last bluntly pointed, and twice the length of the preceding one, 

 with two rows of fasciculi of hairs. First pair of legs didactyle, 

 very large, with the hands much compressed, unequal, the right 

 being the larger, bristly ; the thigh excavated beneath, and its 

 inner margin spinulose ; second pair didactyle, very long, 

 slender ; wrists many-jointed ; other legs terminated by a single 

 claw and spinulose within; the last pair the most slender. 

 Thorax with three short spines anteriorly. Tail with five plates, 

 the middle one blunt at its apex, with four spines arranged in 

 two lines. Colour deep scarlet, except above the eyes, which are 

 concealed under the shell, and above them it is transparent and 

 colourless. The tail is fringed with white hairs, and the legs are 

 mottled with yellow/' 



Upon this, at page 274 (same volume), is a note by Mr. West- 

 wood, in which, with much skill and critical acumen, he traces 

 Mr. Hailstone's individual to the group of Alpheada, and refers 

 it to Cryptophthalmus ruber of Rafmesque, which M. Edwards 

 identifies with his " Alpheus ruber." Mr. Westwood afterwards, 

 at page 552, proposed to elevate it into the type of a new genus 

 by the name of ' Dienecia.' 



Mr. Hailstone's description, as quoted above, might almost 

 stand word for word as applicable to my example, with which it 

 seems to tally in all important particulars, excepting as regards 

 size, which, in the case of Mr. Hailstone's Crustacean, is barely 

 two-thirds that of mine. The figures too attached to Mr. Hail- 

 stone's notice would serve equally well to illustrate mine, with 

 the exception of the hairy fringe attached to the setaceous extre- 

 mities of the superior antennae. 



If I am right in my supposition of the identity of my Channel 

 Island Crustacean with the three individuals described by Mr. 

 Hailstone as brought up by the trawl-net off Hastings in 1835, 

 it is evident that the half-digested relics procured by Mr. Cocks 

 at Falmouth are not the first examples of an Alpheus having 

 been recorded as an inhabitant of the British seas. Indeed it is 

 impossible to read Mr. Hailstone's careful and minute description 

 without feeling convinced that a true Alphean was before him 

 when he made his drawing and description ; and I may be par- 



