Mr. R. I. Pocock on Ebalia nux, }[ilne-Edwards. 101 



surface strongly dentate ; hrachium subcostate behind, 

 smooth, but marked with setiferous pores ; smooth beneath 

 and furnished with many setiferous pores along the iiinder 

 margin ; anterior surface finely granular and sparsely denti- 

 culate ; manus narrow, e([ualliiig in widtii the suj)erior ridge 

 of the " hand-back," with lightly convex but distinctly den- 

 tate and hairy inner margin, scarcely produced posteriorly; 

 the upper surface ornamented with a reticulated pattern formed 

 by the anastomosis of low smooth ridges ; above the superior 

 ridge of tiie " hand-back " tiie surface is subcostate ; inferior 

 surface mostly smooth, coarsely but sparsely granular in 

 front, with two smooth keels ; dactijJi granular, eostate and 

 hairy ; the movable dactylus slightly longer than the iiand. 



Legs, — The femora of the fourth pair feebly granular in 

 front ; for the rest the legs are almost entirely smooth and not 

 eostate ; coxce^ especially of the anterior two pairs, punctured. 



Pectines short, projecting as far as the end of the fourth 

 00X03 ; furnished with fourteen teeth. 



Measurements in millimetres. — Total length 100"5 ; length 

 of cephalothorax 15, width 15"5 ; length of tail 49, of first 

 segment 6'5, of second 7*5, of third 8*2, of fourth 9'5, of fifth 

 12, of vesicle Q)'5^ of aculeus 4*5 ; width of first caudal seg- 

 ment 6'5, of fifth 4'5, of vesicle 4*5 ; length of humerus lo*7 ; 

 brachium, length 14'5, width 5*3 ; width of hand II ; length 

 of" hand-back" 10"5, of movable finger IG'5. 



A single male specimen without special locality. 



In the reticulated sculpturing of the hands this species 

 resembles Sc. indicus (Linn.); but it is of much more slender 

 build, with longer palpi, thinner hands, and longer tail. In 

 the form of its palpi it approaches the male of Sc. fidvipes ; 

 but in this species the upperside of the hand is coarsely granu- 

 lar and subcostate. 



X. — On Ebalia nux, Milne-Edwards. By R. I. PococK. 



My attention has just been called to a passage on p. 316 of 

 the last number of the * Journal of the Marine Biological 

 Association/ in which I regret to see that Canon Nor^nan 

 has taken occasion to charge me by implication with lack of 

 courtesy for not giving what he considers due acknowledg- 

 ment to the name he applied to the above Crustacean; and since 

 such an accusation is likely to carry weight from such a source 

 and to leave a wrong impression on the minds of readers not 



