PROCEEDINGS OF SOCIETIES. 71 



minutes of December, 1866), which rhizopod indicates a kind of 

 compound life, not only by the union of numerous hollow globular 

 clusters of granules pointing to so many centres, as it were, of a 

 kind of secondary individuality, but these seemingly compound 

 clusters are themselves sometimes combined, in certain limited 

 numbers, into larger groups by the union of the pseudopodia. 

 Kaphidiophrys, too, is furnished with spicules — as marked as 

 Sphcerozoum italicum (Hack.) — but it is destitute of "yellow 

 cells." Equally, however, with Eaphidiophrys, as well as the 

 Eadiolarian with a perforate shell twice brought before the Club 

 by Mr. Archer (from Ireland and Wales : see minutes of April 

 and July), which latter indicated even stronger affinity to the 

 marine types, the present Actinophryan likewise showed nothing 

 comparable to the "yellow cells;" and hence the perhaps vague 

 idea here thrown out touching the principal subject of the present 

 exhibition may be of little value. Yet, though the similarity may 

 be regarded as but superficial and the affinity be thought remote, 

 still one could not look at Hackel's figures nor his statements 

 without being at least in a measure struck by the resemblance. 



The allusion to the perforate Eadiolarian suggested to Mr. Archer 

 to inform the Club that identically the same animal as his had been 

 brought forward in May last, by Cienkowski, in Schultze's ' Archiv 

 fiir mikroskopische Anatomic ' (Bd. iii. Heft iii, 1867, p. 311, 

 t. xviii), which Mr. Archer had only just had an opportunity 

 of seeing. Cienkowski had described it under the name of 

 Clatlirulina elegans. There could not be any doubt whatever 

 that the animal Mr. Archer had mentioned (and which he had 

 described at the June meeting of the Natural History Society of 

 Dublin, but which he would now withdraw) was perfectly iden- 

 tical with the newly-described Eadiolarian, Clatlirulina elegans 

 (Cienkowski). Having, however, seen Cienkowski's paper and 

 figures, it now seemed probable to Mr. Archer that he must have 

 mistaken the " cyst " referred to by that author for the repre- 

 sentative of the "central capsule" (see pi. xviii, fig. 7, loc. cit.). 

 Of these sharply-defined bodies (probably Cienskowski's cysts) 

 only one had ever presented itself in any single individual of the 

 Irish specimens as yet, hence (not having been so fortunate as to 

 see any further development) the mistake might be considered 

 the more excusable, as, moreover, a by no means indefinite internal 

 contour was to be seen even in examples with extended pseudo- 

 podia. 



It would at least be not without its interest, however, to have 

 recorded the occurrence of this novel form in the British Islands, 

 especially as only two other localities are given for it (in Eussia 

 and in Grermany) ; and there as here, as Cienskowski states, it 

 " occurs very sparingly and rarely." Its minuteness, however, 

 may be partly the cause of its not having been previously detected 

 in other localities. As indicating the likelihood of this, Mr. Archer 

 thought it might be interesting to add another Irish locality to 

 that of Gallery Bog, and that was in Co. Tipperary, in a gathering 



