154 Mr. J. W. Fcwkcs on Angelopsls. 



The interior is hollow, forming a cavity wliicli is destitute 

 of an external orifice. This cavity is divided into regions and 

 is lined by a more or less cartilaginous * plate. Auralia 

 alone of the Auronect^ resembles Angelopsis in the absence 

 of an external orifice to this cavity. 



Directly below the air-float the cavity of the polyp-stem 

 forms a thin disk-shaped recess, the upper walls of which are 

 formed by the float, the lower by lamellar folds of the carti- 

 laginous plate which lines the cavity of the polyp-stem. A 

 large orifice or communication leads from tliis vestibule into 

 the main cavity {cav. h.) of the polyp-stem. There is no 

 opening from the cavity of the float into the vestibule [cav.) of 

 the cavity of the polyp-stem. 



Cormidia. — The clusters of sexual bodies [p) and polypites 

 dot the whole underside and skirt tlie margin of the external 

 surface of the polyp- stem of Angelopsis. They are in a very 

 poor state of preservation, so that I am unable to recognize 

 with certainty their different parts. I have supposed that 

 each cluster consists of a central axis, with clusters of male 

 and female sexual bells arising from its external walls. 

 Some of these are much larger than the others, and those are 

 interpreted as polypites; but of this interpretation I have 

 some doubt. Tentacles were not observed, and if they once 

 existed have been ruptured from their connexion with the 

 cormidia. Ha^ckel finds tentacles and tentacular knobs or 

 like structures in several genera which he regards as closely 

 related to Angelopsis; but I have not been able to find them 

 in this genus. A small fragment of the shell t (test) of a 

 sea-urchin was found clinging to the underside of the polyp- 

 stem, and I have supposed that it was held there by the ten- 

 tacles ; but the only structures observed were those which 

 looked like immature tentacular knobs. 



After calling attention to the possibility that Angelopsis is 

 the same as another genus {Auralia) , llackel speaks of the 

 "inaccuracy" of my description and the "superficiality" 

 of my examination oi Angelop)sis. 



So far as inaccuracy goes this criticism is believed to be 

 unjust, although the poor character of my material rendered 

 it difficult to make out many details of structure. My descrip- 



* The use of tbe word cartilaginous liei*e and elsewhere refers rather 

 to the tough natui'e of this plate than to its histological characters. It 

 recalls closely the " shell " of Velclla in its general characters and ditTers 

 very strikingly from the soft gelatinous body of most Medusae. 



t In the original figure of Ajigelopsis this little fragment was repre- 

 sented ; but when my second drawing was made this foreign body had 

 dropped off and was found in the bottom of the bottle containing the 

 type. 



