38 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



described the species using- James's specific name, and as his descrip 

 tions are based on typical Escharopora paeon la., James's name is also 

 made synonymous with this species. 



D'Orbigny's species is disting'uished from the other forms of Et^eha- 

 I'opoi'd l)y its broad zoarium. It is a common fossil and is found at 

 most localities in Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, and Tennessee where the 

 beds of the P'aiivicw formation are exposed. 



EURYDICTYA MULTIPORA (Hall?) Ulrich. 

 Plate I, figs. 11, 12. 



Phu'iiopard midtijiDra Hall, Foster and Whitney's Rep. (Tei)l. Lake Superior 



Land District, Ft. 2, 1851, p. 206, pi. xxiv, figs \a,b. 

 Phii'nopom? multiporaJJiMiCM, .Tour. Cincinnati Soc. Nut. Hist., V, 1SS2, ]). 171, 



pi. VIII, figs. 7-7h. 

 Eurjidlrtnamiiltipom Ulrich, Geol. Snrv. Illinois, VIII, 1890, p. r)20. 

 Ptilodictya nntUput James, I*aleontologist, No. 5, 1881, p. 87. 



The type of Ptilod Icti/a anttipia ^mxif^H is identical with the specimens 

 figured and described by Ulrich in 1882 "■ as Plieemypcmt ? imiltlpora 

 Hall. As admitted Iw Ulrich in 1893, an examination of the internal 

 characters of Hall's type specimen is necessary before it can be posi- 

 tively stated that his identification is correct. Until this is done, the 

 synon3'm3^ had best remain as given above. For the identification of 

 the species, at least the Kentucky form, Ulrich's description and tigures 

 should be consulted. 



Orciirrruce. — Hall's types were found in Trenton strata along the 

 Escanaba River. Michigan, while those of James and Ulrich came from 

 the Lexington limestone in the vicinity of Harrodsburg and Burgin, 

 Kentucky, respectively. 



FISTULIPORA? MULTIPORA James. 



FIstidiporn? innJlipont Jamks, raleontologist. No. 1, 1878, p. 2. 



In 1888 James and James decided that Fistnliprnxt m.ultipm'a .fames 

 and Chiloporella{Fistulipora) flaheUata\}\v\ch. were synonymous with 

 Ceramojxn'ii nichol^onl James published in 1875. The specimens in 

 the James collection lal)elled as the types of F. mnlfqwra^ however, 

 consist of the following: 



(1) Twenty-one specimens of ('eraiuoporiUa dixfiiK-ta Ulrich from 

 the Eden shale at Cincinnati and vicinity. 



(2) Six typical examples of Chilopordla fiahellata Ulrich. 



If the majority ruled in such cases, F. nnilfipora would certainly 

 not be a synonym of C. nleJiolxoni as decided l)y James. However, 

 in view of the facts (1) that the name was placed in synonymy by its 

 author, (2) that the types represent two distinct aiul w^ell-defined 

 species, and (8) that the original diagnosis is not onl}' insufficient, but 



"Jour. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., V, 1882, p. 171. 



