Biiiish Fofisil Crlnokh. 217 



The geological and geograpliioal distribution of these 

 species are nowhere even hinted at, an omission justly de- 

 pk)rcd l)y L. von liueii (18 i5, ' TJeber Cystideeu/ pp. 113- 

 114) when he leferred S. jacksonl and S. uaapeptainenus to 

 Criq^tucrhius cerasus, an Ordovician oystid, haviiij;, erro- 

 neously I think, interpreted Austin^s detinitions to mean that 

 the third circlet of plates in S. anapeptamenus was homo- 

 logous with the third circlet in S. jacksoni. Von Buch 

 rightly noted the distinction between S. clausus (witli four 

 circlets) and S. jacksoni (with three circlets). 



Commenting on this in November 1818 (Quart. Journ. 

 Oeol. Soo. vol, iv, Proc. p. 293), T. Austin, F.G.S. [i. e. the 

 Fort-Major], appeared to accept Von Buch's reference of two 

 species to Crijj)tocrirms, and explained that they occi;rred 

 "in the carbouiftn-ous limestone of Yoi'kshire," That state- 

 ment was lU'obably intended to apply also to S clausns. 

 Similarly in October 1851 (Ann, & Mag. Nat. IJist. ser. 3, 

 vol. viii. pp. 289-290) Fort-Major Austin, in maintaining 

 afiainst Edward Forbes that cystids were found in the 

 Carboniferous rocks, implied that some, if not all, of his 

 specimens of St/cocrinus came from " our Mountain Lime^ 

 stone. ^' 



H. G. Bronn in 1800 {' Klass. und Ordn.' vol. ii. p. 230) and 

 Dujardin & Hupe in 18G2 (' Echinodermes,' p. 70) mentioned 

 the name Sycocrinites as a synonym of Cryptoorinus, doubt- 

 less without independent enquiry. 



About twenty years ago the late Mr. R. Etheridge, F.liS., 

 showed me some drawings by T. Austin (? junior) arranged 

 as a plate in continuation of the Austins' ' iMonograi)h.^ 

 Some of these, to my delight, represented the three species 

 of Sycocrinus, the names beiug pencilleil on the back of the 

 sheet by Ft.-Major Austin, It was on this evidence, and 

 before 1 had observed the above-quoted statements as to the 

 horizon, that in 1900 I published the remark ; ''' the authors^ 

 ]\1S. drawings suggest that ;S'. cluusus = Laycnlocriitiis, 

 S. jacksoni^=Cryptocrwiis, and S. auapept<niitiius=zllyj)o^ 

 (•r'uius'' ('Tieatise on Zoology,' vol. iii. p. 203). With the 

 I'airly clear evidence of the figures bel'ore me, I had not 

 troubled to compare them with Austin's published definitions. 

 Had I done so 1 should have detected a mistake in Austin's 

 o\\u reference. It is cjuitc plain that in his roughly j)encillcd 

 note he transposed the numbers 3 and 4, which should 

 refer to S. clausus and S. jacksoni respectively. Only thus 

 ran the drawings in cjuestion be made to agree with tiie 

 definitions. Hud 1 observed this, 1 would have written 

 '' S. jacksoni = Laaeniocrinus, B. clausus = Cry ptocj-inus." 



11* 



I 



