22 
deeply-laciniate leaves, two of which—namely those at either end of the major 
axis—are thin almost horizontal wing-like expansions formed of a principal 
septum and its corresponding thin foliaceous costa (the “ lateral” coste). 
The two faces of the corallum are quite flat (that is, not in any way 
curved) and each is traversed by five broad low cost, corresponding with the 
septa of the first two cycles, between which are the less distinct cost of the 
third and, sometimes, of the fourth cycles. The coste and the spaces between 
them are regularly marked with ripple-like growth-lines. 
The septa are in six systems and four complete cycles, with an incomplete 
and inconspicuous fifth. Those of the first two cycles are pre-eminently large 
and, with those of the fourth cycle, form the jagged middle lobes of the twelve 
leaves above-mentioned. Those of the third cycle are much larger than those 
of the fourth but are not nearly so far exsert. The surfaces of the septa are 
much wrinkled or cockled, the convexities of the wrinkles being finely spicu- 
lar. 
The columella, such as it is, is formed by the fusion, in the very bottom of 
the calicle, of the first three systems of septa. 
The fresh corallum, like the living polyp, is of a dark madder colour, but 
the dry corallum fades. 
This species is one of the common inhabitants of the Indian Seas at depths 
of 400 to 600 fms. We have dredged it in the Andaman Sea, at several places 
in the Bay of Bengal, and at several places in the Laccadive Sea. It appears 
to prefer soft muddy bottoms. 
As the late Professor Martin Duncan remarked, the corallum is so fragile 
that it is sometimes broken by the postmortem contraction of the soft parts. 
Dr. A. R. Anderson, the present Surgeon-Naturalist with the “ Investigator,” 
has, however, had the good fortune to dredge some perfect specimens, one of 
which is now figured. 
I have carefully compared our specimens with the original figures and 
description of Philippi and with Seguenza’s figures, and I feel no doubt about 
the identity of our species with theirs. But Ido not feel the same certainty 
with regard to Martin Duncan’s figures. 
In the synonomy of this species Ulocyathus arcticus Sars (“ Reise i 
Lofodden, p. 21; and Faun. Lit. Norv. 2 heft 1856, p. 73, pl. x. figs. 8-27”) is 
included by Martin Duncan and Lindstrém: I have not seen the papers 
referred to. Lindstriém also includes (1) Flabellum MacAndrewi Gray (P. Z. 
S. 1849, p. 75, Radiata, pl. ii. fig. 11) which is founded on fragments the figures 
of which are insufficient for comparison, and (2) Flabellum alabastrum, Moseley 
(*‘ Challenger’? Deep Sea Madreporaria, p. 169, pl. vii. figs. 1, la—b, 2, 2a-6, 
and pl. xvi. fig. 11). I can only say that I have examined a large number of 
