98 Bibliographical Notices. 



antero- and postcro-lateral rays, the simple arm of the anterior ray, 

 and the peculiar pits at the angles of the plates of the body." These 

 pits are well shown in the figure of Scaphiocnnas unicKS in the sixth 

 volume of the ' Illinois lleports,' and they also appear in the figure 

 of Ahrotocrinus cymosus given by MiUer and Gurlej', who describe 

 the plates as " sunken at the angles." 



But how is it that they know so little about ScapJiiocrinus unims 

 as to have described its undivided anterior ray as the "proboscis" 

 of a new genus and species ? 



The ' Journal of the Boston Society of Natural Historj- ' and the 

 ' Illinois Geological Reports' are neither written in German, which 

 Mr. Miller abhors, nor published in Kussia, like Trautschold's descrip- 

 tions and figures of t'romi/oci'inns and PlnaJocrinus, which he also 

 ignores ; and it is not too much to expect that an American palaeon- 

 tologist should make himself acquainted with their contents before 

 committing himself to the publication of new generic and specific 

 types. Mr. Miller has recently told us how " it is high time American 

 palaeontologists would cease to look to England for information, 

 where less is known of its own fossil Crinoids than happens to the 

 lot of any other country in which there is any pretension to pala?on- 

 tological knowledge, and where more shallow pretenders vent their 

 stupid hypotheses as to the fossil tests of these animals than exist 

 in any other land." But it rather seems as if some American authors 

 were not very well acquainted with the fossil Crinoids of their own 

 country. I need not say that I do not refer to Mr. Wachsmuth, 

 for whose comi)rehen8ivc knowledge of the American Paheozoic 

 Crinoids I have the most profound respect. 



It would seem therefore, unless good reason can be shown to the 

 contrary, that Abrotocrinus, yEsiocrinv:^, Delocriniis, and Uhcrinus 

 are not new genera at all, but merely new names for types which 

 are by no means so well known as they should be ; and it is thus 

 very unfortunate that the names selected by Messrs. Miller and 

 Gurley should be so singularly inappropriate, for they tell us that 

 n/3^oros =immortal; a tT(os = auspicious, coming at good time; h']\os 

 = manifest, clear; and ovAo$ = solid, substantial! 



The last of Messrs. Miller and Gurley's new Crinoidal genera is 

 Goniocriiius, which seems to be a real novelty related to Ci/atJio- 

 crlnus. A small quadrangular " azygous plate'' is inserted between 

 the upper slojnng sides of two basals and the under sides of the 

 right radial and the second az^-gous plate. The latter truncates 

 a basal, " and is in line witli the first radials and of about the same 

 size ; the three following plot(>s are of the same size as the brachials 

 and form a prominent convex ridge to the tliird bracliials. when 

 the series abrupt!}' curves under tlu^ arms." Elsewhere we are told 

 that it forms " a convex arm-like appendage that curves in toward 

 tlie ]>r()boscis at or above the base of the free arms." In view of 

 Bather's recent spectdations concerning the morphology of the 

 ventral tube in tlie Eistulata, one would like to know more about 

 this genus, to which Miller's Vi/athocrini(s /fdrriai should probably 

 also be referred, as suggested bj* himself and Mr. (iurley. 



