[MATTHEW] STUDIES ON CAMBRIAN FAUSNA 93 



mi, Earr, in the Bohemian Etage D. d, 1, and all the American species in 

 the Quebec Group [=Arenig] H. hospes, Beyr. (found loose) is referred 

 to the basal limestone of the Lower Silurian. . . . H. hospes, H. 

 Grimmi and H. rugosus have, off from the glabella, a rounded elevation 

 which Beyrich and Barrande regard as an eye, which as in Harpes 

 connects by a fillet with the dorsal furrow. In S. breviceps one finds 

 corresponding to this an oval tubercle immediately beside the doi-sal 

 furrow, situated just as in the typical species, of the genus Conocoryphe ; 

 Barrande is inclined to think this tubercle an eye. Whether this difference 

 in position of the supposed eye should be thought of generic significance 

 is for the present difficult to decide. I think that in any case it is best 

 to preserve AngeUn's generic name. Without giving anj' sufficient ground 

 Barrande refers^, breviceps to Conocoryphe (Conocephalites). Especially 

 do I think it best to retain Harpides because of the absence of a mar- 

 ginal rim and because of the raised circumference of the head-shield in 

 II. breviceps.'' 



" The English species Erinnys venulosa, Salt., seems to be very like this ; 

 it occurs in the Middle Menevian at St. David's ; according to the figures it 

 has a narrower head and larger glabella. The most important difference 

 is that in E. venulosa, the head-shield is bordered all around [by a mar- 

 ginal fold]. In H. breviceps the head-shield is edged only behind, the 

 front edge is devoid of any trace of marginal furrow and fold. E. venulosa 

 in the figures shows a distinctly elevated edge, bounded within by a plain 

 furrow ; for me this difference plainly distinguishes H. breviceps from 

 Erinnys. Salter thinks that the species of Harpides described by Angelin 

 belong to Erinnys, but he is quite mistaken in regard to H. rugosus." 



" Perhaps the semicircular thin edge which forms the extreme 

 boundary of the head-shield is not the actual margin of the head. Eather 

 may one think that beyond this edge runs a suture which separates a 

 small movable cheek analogous to those of the genus Conocoryphe. It 

 seems not improbable also that Erinnys has a similar free-cheek, and that 

 Carausia Menevensis, Hicks, is no other than an Erinnys that has retained 

 them." 



" This species occurs occasionally in the slate with Conocoryphe œqualis, 

 in which Hr. v. Schmalensee found two examples.^ Less rare at Andra- 

 rum though even there not by any means common." 



In the figure accompanying Linnarsson's very complete description 

 of the head of this species given above, the median ocular (?) crest of the 

 cheek is represented as having several strong branches, this appearance 

 is foreign to Conocoryphe, Ctenocephalus, Erinnys and Carausia, and we 

 think is an error of the artist ; therefore we do not see anything in this 

 to separate the Newfoundland species from H. breviceps. 



1 The slate with C. œqualis comes immediately below that with Paradoxides 

 Davidis at Andrarum— G. F. M. 



