312 Records of the Indian Museum (VoL. XII, 
the bodywall in front of the clitellum,—none visible, at any rate. 
Behind the clitellum the disposition is quite different ; the micro- 
nephridia, few and relatively large, are attached to the bodywall; 
towards the posterior end of the (incomplete) specimen there were 
about half a dozen nephridia of moderate size on each side in each 
segment, but no meganephridium. 
Testes and funnels are free, in segments x and xi. The vesi- 
culae seminales are two pairs, in xi and xii, on the anterior wall 
of each segment. Those in xi are very small, those in xii of moder- 
ate size. 
The prostates are one pair, long, flat and strap-like, with slightly 
lobed margins, and extending backwards to segment xxi; they 
look at first sight like small flattened masses of coagulum on the 
bodywall. The portions of the gland in successive segments are 
connected only by narrow necks; but each of the quadrangular 
expansions which occupy the individual segments appeared to be 
lobular in constitution, and the margins are slightly indented. 
One gland was sectioned; not more than one duct was visible, 
which was seen to give off, in one section, a small side branch; but 
even the single central duct becomes difficult or impossible of 
distinction some distance down the series. 
The prostatic duct begins near the anterior inner angle of the 
gland, and forms an oval loop, passing first inwards and backwards, 
then curving round outwards and forwards ; it is of equal diameter 
throughout and is confined to segment xviii. No penial setae were 
discovered. 
Ovaries were present in xiii; funnels were not identified. 
A couple of small structures in xiv may perhaps represent ovisacs ; 
but the specimen was too small to allow a definite determination 
of their nature. 
The spermathecae (fig. 7) are pyriform sacs, narrowing to form 
a duct which is not marked off in any way from the lower part of 
the ampulla. A single diverticulum arises from the middle of the 
length of the duct; it is narrow and club-shaped, with a simple 
cavity, and in length is about two-fifths as long as duct and ampulla 
together. No spermatophores were seen; and there were no glan- 
duiar appendages round the duct. 
Kkemarks.—The differences of the above specimens from the 
typical form (Michaelsen, 14) entitle it to rank as a variety. The 
distinguishing marks are the prostomium, the setal intervals, the 
smaller extent of the clitellum, the position of the gizzard (here in 
v), and the absence of glands round the spermatheca. I think the 
nephridia are also likely to form a distinction; Michaelsen could 
not see any; they must therefore be very small in the typical 
form, or else Michaelsen’s specimens must have been in a very bad 
state of preservation ,—which however is not stated to have been the 
case. Evenina badly preserved specimen I think nephridia of the 
size of those I found would probably have been visible. Michael- 
sen puts the male pores on the swellings in xviii; they seemed to 
