196 Mr. F. A. Bather on British Fossil Crinoids : 
In the Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge : 
a/493, an almost complete specimen, with the crown slightly 
disturbed ; seen from right posterior radius. Ona 
slab of limestone. Dudley. In the Fletcher collec- 
tion. (PI. XI. fig. 3, explanation on p. 194.) 
For permission to figure the first and last of these speci- 
mens my thanks are here given to Dr. Henry Woodward, 
F.R.S., and Prof. T. M°Kenny Hughes. For similar favours, 
as well as for the loan of the specimens in the Mason College 
and the Dudley Museums, I must express my gratitude to 
Prof. C. Lapworth and Mr. W. Madeley. 
These specimens all appear to come from the Upper Wen- 
lock Limestone; but, as usual, their exact locality and horizon 
are uncertain. They all belong to one species, for which I 
propose the name— 
Mastigocrinus loreus, sp. n. 
1873. Cyathocrinus (sp. 9) arboreus, J. W. Salter, nom. nud., Cat. 
Camb. and Sil. Foss. p. 125: Cambridge. 
Non Cyathocrinus arboreus, Meek and Worthen, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. 
Philadelphia for 1865, p. 160, and Rep. Geol. Sury. Illinois, vol. iii. 
p- 520 (1868). 
Cyathocrinus sp. 11, Salter, loc. cit. 
The trivial name applied to this species means “ provided 
with lashes,” and, besides carrying on the metaphor of the 
generic name, it alludes to the very fine terminations of the 
arms. 
DETAILED DESCRIPTION. 
The plates of all the specimens except 57048 B.M. are 
somewhat displaced, so that the measurements here given refer 
chiefly to that. For details connected with the Cambridee 
specimen | am indebted to drawings furnished by Mr. Edwin 
Wilson, as well as to an excellent photograph sent me by the 
Cambridge Engraving Co.: the specimen itself I have never 
seen, as it cculd never be found when I went to the Wood- 
wardian Museum; for information that it was at last forth- 
coming I am obliged to Mr. H. Woods. The specimen 
a/497 which Salter labelled ‘Cyathocrinus sp. 11,” was also 
thought to be missing (see Cat. Type Fossils, Woodwardian 
Mus. p. 89, Cambridge, “1891,” 1892); but, through the 
kindness of Mr. Woods in sending me a rough sketch of it, 
I am able to refer it, as was to be anticipated, to the present 
species. The specimen consists of a rather disturbed crown, 
