14 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
the Oxford Clay of Chippenham that had been described by Pearce! 
many years previously under this same name. It is fortunate for the 
sake of comparison that the genus Belemnoteuthis is so well known; 
indeed, few fossilized animals have left more complete remains. 
The type-specimen of Lelemnoteuthis Montefiored is now in the 
British Museum collection (No. C. 5,026). It does not bear an original 
label stating it to be the figured specimen, but a comparison with 
Professor Buckman’s figure leaves no room for doubt. Since the figure 
was drawn for his plate, the uppermost portion of the slab has been 
detached and replaced in such a manner that the arms have now the 
same general direction as the rest of the body.? There are six double 
rows of hooklets, although the relative position of the hooklets in the 
outermost row on each side is not quite so clearly indicated as in the 
rest. In these double rows the bases of the hooklets on one side are 
opposed to the bases of the hooklets on the other side, clearly showing 
that each double row belonged to only one arm. Hence in this 
specimen there are indications of only six arms. The two outermost 
arms are, as Professor Buckman stated, longer than the rest; they 
were apparently more slender, and we note also that their hooklets are 
more sparsely distributed than on the remaining four arms. Of the 
latter, the two outer ones are, as shown in Professor Buckman’s figure, 
a little longer than the others. 
The arms, in fact, can be arranged in three pairs; the first pair 
consisting of the two outer arms; the second, the two intermediate 
ones; and the third, the two inner ones. ‘The enlarged drawing given 
by Professor Buckman admirably shows the form of the hooklets, and 
enables one to compare them on the one hand with the hooklets of 
Belemnoteuthis, so well figured by Owen * and others, and on the other 
hand with those which have been found associated with the guards 
of Belemnites and figured by Huxley* in his classical work on the 
structure of the Belemnitidee (pl. 1, figs. la, 2a). The thickened obtuse 
character of their bases enables us to distinguish them from the 
hooklets of Belemnoteuthis, that have their bases simply drawn out to 
a point, and to identify them with those of Belemnites. If, therefore, 
the hooklets belonged to the same animal as the rest of the remains— 
and we see no adequate reason for supposing that they did not—their 
character warrants the separation of the present specimen from 
Belemnoteuthis and its reference to Belemnites. 
Then with regard to the number of the arms. There are now in 
the British Museum collection a number of specimens (sixteen) from 
the Lias in the neighbourhood of Charmouth and Lyme Regis, each 
exhibiting similar uncinated arms associated usually with an ink- 
bag, and sometimes also with portions of a nacreous pro-ostracum. 
1 J.C. Pearce: Proc. Geol. Soc., vol. iii (1842), p. 593. 
2 When figured by Professor Buckman the broken edge aé (in the Plate accompanying 
this paper) was joined to the edge ed. 
R. Owen: Phil. Trans., 1844, pls. iii, v, and vi (especially). See also J. C. Pearce : 
London Geol. Journ., No. 2 (Feb 1847), pl. xvi. 
4 T. H. Huxley: Mem. Geol. Surv. ., Monog. ii (Structure of the Belemnitide), 1864. 
ao 
