80 PERIPATUS AND ITS OCCURRENCE IN AUSTRALIA 5 
The different species of Peripatus have a wide geographical 
range. (1) Peripatus juliformis, Guz/d, 1826, has been reported 
from St. Vincent and other West Indian islands ; (2) P. Edwardsi, 
Blanch, 1847 (P. juliformis, Andouin et M. Edw., 1833) from 
Venezuela and French Guiana ; (3) Blainvillei, Alanchard, 1847, 
from Chili, and from St. Thomas—Baird ; (4) P. capensis, Gruée, 
1864-7 (P. brevis, Blainville et Gervais) from Cape of Good 
Hope; (5) P. Leuckarti, Saenger, 1869, from New Holland; (6) 
P. quitensis, Schmarda, 1871, from Quito; (7) P. noves-zealandie, 
flutton, 1876, from New Zealand ; (8) P. torquatus, Kennel, from 
‘Trinidad ; and (9) P. Balfouri, Sedyzwzck, 1885-6, from Cape of 
Good Hope. 
Its chief interest resides in the fact that from its structure it 
must be regarded as a prototype and ancestor of one of the great 
sub-kingdoms of animals, viz., that one comprising the air-breathing 
and other Arthropods, and at the same time a connecting link 
between these and animals still lower in the scale than they. Its 
relations with other animals point to such diverse affinities that its 
position amongst invertebrates has been a matter of dispute. 
The founder of the genus, the Rev. L. Guilding, in 1826 placed 
Peripatus in the sub-kingdom, which included the shell-bearing 
and naked molluscs; Gervais, in 1837, pronounced it a myriapod. 
Other naturalists, including Guatrefages, Blanchard and Milne- 
Edwards decided that it was a member of the sub-kingdom 
Vermes—the worms, and Ehlers, Schmarda, Claus, Grube, Haeckel 
and numerous other naturalists placed it also in this sub-kingdom, 
but in a separate family—the Onchophora. De Blainville located 
the genus Peripatus as coming between the Myriapoda and the 
worms. Latterly, however, Gervais’ opinion has been upheld, and 
it has been placed by Moseley and others amongst the jointed- 
limbed animals, the Arthropoda, in the air-breathing section of 
that sub-kingdom, it being now regarded as the sole representative 
of the Protracheata of Gegenbaur and of the Peripatidea of Huxley. 
Different affinities are suggested according as one or other systems 
composing its organization are passed under review. _ For instance, 
to mention the indications given by Gegenbaur in different parts of 
his Grundiss der Vergletchenden Anatomie. Its simple, unsegmented 
body resembles that of one of the Annulata. Its appendages, 
like lateral expansions of the body, present serial similarity, as 
do the parapodia of Annelids, and as also, to a certain extent, 
do those of Myriapods. In Peripatus, as Gegenbaur remarks, the 
appendages retain their lowest condition, and their resemblance 
