BY R. ETHERIDGE, JUNR., AND JOHN MITCHELL. 503 



The previous use of Dalmania seems to have escaped the 

 notice of Barrande, for we find him using the name throughout 

 the first volume of his magnificent work on the Bohemian Silu- 

 rian System, until nearly the close of the volume, when for a 

 single species in the Addenda, the word Dabnanites is employed, 

 and continues throughout the atlas. It is therefore possible that 

 in the interval Barrande discovered the inutility of the name 

 Dalmania^ and by the use of the termination ites sought to dis- 

 criminate between Dalmania^ Emmrich, and Dalmanites, Barrande. 

 At the same time an objection has been raised by some authors 

 that even Dahnauites is not sufficiently distinctive. 



Prof. James Hall, in one of his numerous critical contributions 

 to American Paljeontology, seems inclined to advocate the claims 

 of Odontocephalus, Conrad, 1840 (= CryphceuSj Green, 1837, non 

 Cryphcens, Klug, 1833, a genus of Coleoptera; and PUuracantlius^ 

 M, Edw., 1840, non Pleur acanthus, Ag., 1837, an Ichthyodorulite). 

 If, however, Odontocephalus is restricted to forms resembling its 

 type species, Asaphus selenurus, Eaton (= Calyineneodontocejyhala, 

 Green), in which the anterior border of the cephalon is denticu- 

 lated or fimbriated, a good generic distinction, it cannot possibly 

 clash with Dalmanites. Indeed, we imagine this had already 

 struck Prof. Hall, for in the seventh Vol. of the Palaeontology of 

 New York, ])y himself and Mr. J. M. Clarke, we find both names 

 acknowledged much on the lines now explained. PleuracantJius 

 might have been adopted had not Agassiz in 1837 made use of 

 the term for an Ichthyodorulite. 



Unless we have overlooked any step in the discrimination of 

 this generic type, and that is not impossible, there remain two 

 courses open to us — either to a.diO^t'^ Dalmanites, following Bar- 

 rande, or to propose a new genus. We are loth to adopt the 

 latter alternative, more especially as Hall and Clarke have pro- 

 posed as a subgenus under Dalmanites the name Hausmannia, 

 with practically the same characters as the genus proper. They 

 remark, "It is here proposed to group under the type Hausmannia 

 the typical and unvaried forms of Dalmanites, which follow t he 



