AKT. 15 THE FOSSIL, CRICOID GENUS VASOCRINUS KIRK 5 



posterior interradiiis. There is no reason to believe that the cup was 

 more perfect in Lyon's day than now. The broken margin of the 

 cup is weathered, and nowhere is there a sign of fresh fracture. 

 There can be no question as to the identity of the specimen. It 

 bears a piece of paper with a, printed number (in this case 119) such 

 as is found on all of Lyon's specimens. There is also an inked " 3a " 

 on the specimen, referring to the figure on his plate, and the plates 

 of the cup are outlined with ink in the same manner as other figured 

 specimens in his collection. It is evident that the fourth and fifth 

 radials shown in the background of his figure were supplied by the 

 draftsman. The description of the ])osterior interradius and the 

 generic diagram presumably based on this specimen were made from 

 specimen Sb as will be shown hereafter. Although said by Lyon 

 to be the only specimen of the species known. 3a is here made a 

 cotype of the species. Specimen 36, referred by Lyon to V. sculpfics, 

 is made a companion cotype. As will be shown specimen 36 was 

 used by Lyon in his description of vaJens and is almost certainly 

 referable to that species. 



Specimen 36 as studied by Lyon was partially embedded in a frag- . 

 ment of limestone, concealing the upper part of the posterior inter- 

 radius. The specimen has been very badly treated. The infra- 

 basals have been broken oif and cemented on again. The portion of 

 the cup extending from the 1. post. K across the post. IE. and around 

 almost to the ant. R. has been deeply gouged by a chisel or similar 

 instrument, until little of the original surface remains. So badly 

 defaced is the specimen that it is difficult to figure it in such a way 

 as to give a correct idea of its original form. I have cleaned the 

 higher part of the post. IR and lifted the entire specimen off the 

 rock. In cleaning the specimen and to avoid mistakes the plate 

 outlines as inked in by Lyon have been washed off. Lyon's number 

 for this specimen was 119, the same as for the type specimen of 

 V. val&ns. It appears that Lyon himself had originally referred 

 this specimen to valens. In his explanation of the plate on page 

 497 this specimen appears under the title Vasocrinus valens, although 

 assigned to V. sculptus, " from which the external sculpture has 

 been removed." In the legend at the foot of the plate this specimen, 

 although the first referred to sculptus, is described as '' F. sculptus, 

 different specimen basal view." From the crowding of the words 

 and the wording itself I believe that Lyon had first referred this 

 specimen to valens and had changed his mind after the plate had 

 been engraved, erasing and changing the specific name from valens 

 to sculptus. Even more striking proof is afforded by the figure 

 itself and the specimen as originally marked. In the description 

 both of valens and of the genus, as well as in the generic diagram, 

 the posterior interradius agrees with Figure 36 and Avith the specimen 



