Miscellaneous. 385 



with a head of Latiu, a tail of Greek, and the whole a plural form ! 

 Agassiz knew well what he was about when he rejected it and 

 appUed Palmipes to the genus *. Professor Jeffrey Bell calls atten- 

 tion to the loose way in which Palmipes is employed by Linck ; and 

 of course authors can use their judgment in writing either Palmipes, 

 Linck, Palmipes (Linck), Agass., or Palmipes, Agass. ; for although 

 Agassiz gave Linck the credit of the genus, the last of these is quite 

 correct according to the direction in Brit. Assoc. Rules : — " Names 

 used by previous [i. e. prae-Linnaean] authors may often be applied 

 with propriety to modern genera, yet in such cases they acquire a 

 new meaning, and should be quoted on the authority of the first 

 person who used them in this secondary sense." 



5, Date of Coelasterias. 



Sladen's reference is quite correct and intelligible to me — " Verrill, 

 Trans. Conn. Acad. Arts and Sci. 1871 (1807)." I take it that 

 Dr. Gray's copy in Brit. Mus. bearing date 1869 is only a part of 

 the reissue. My own copy of " Notes on the lladiata in the Museum of 

 Yale College &c.'' is paged 2-i7 to 611, and has ten plates ; the several 

 sheets are all dated, the last being " March 1871,'' and the first page 

 (247) contains the description of Ccelaslerias, above which is " Head 

 Jan. 16th, 1867," and at the bottom of the page " Trans. Connec- 

 ticut Acad. vol. i. February 1867." I may add that the work as 

 far as p. 502 bears date " March 1869," and this perhaps represents 

 the portion in B. M. Library, 



6. Lophaster furcifer. 



Sladen's date, Chcetaster borealis, 1844, seems quite correct; at 

 least, he has the author's own statement of date, " May 1844," to 

 rely upon; and Diiben \Aithdrew the specific MS. name "■boi-ealis" 

 and substituted for it Solaster furcifer himself {vide Diib. & Kor. 

 p. 245, note). 



7. Marginaster. 



Some naturalists of very high standing, e. g. G. 0. Sars, when 

 they meet with a species manifestly generically distinct from allies 

 prefer to allow a full general description to stand for both genus 

 and species for a time in hope that other allied forms may be found 

 which will more accurately show what should be regarded as generic 

 and what as specific characters. I do not defend, I only state the 

 custom ; but in such cases it is surely correct to refer to the descrip- 

 tion, which was intended to be both generic and specific. 



8. On the Presence of Rare Forms on the East Coast. 



I presume that Prof. BeU is satisfied Dr. Sutherland's specimen 



• Vide Anseropoda in the Nomeiicl. Zool. of Agassiz both among Echi- 

 noderniatft and in TJeneral Index. 



