I 



'( V^'^ 



I 



Mr. C. C. Babington on a new species o/Eleocharis. 19 



Belemnoteuthis appears to have been calcareous, like that of the 

 Sepia. In all essential points of structure the Belemnoteuthis is 



Fie. 4. 



1, 3. Detached hooks {natural size). 



2. Three hooks with attached horny 



rings : from a specimen in the 

 possession of Mr. Cunnington. 



4. Part of one of the arms, showing 

 four hooked spines. 



6. Transverse section of the distal part 

 of the osselet of Belemnoteuthis, 

 exposing the apex of the cham- 

 bered shell in the centre, sur- 

 rounded by the radiated osselet, 

 a : {magnified four diameters). Horny rings and hooks of 



Belemnoteuthis antiquus. 



related to the Calamaries, but the lateral position of the fins, the 

 presence of a chambered shell or phragmocoue, and the peculiar 

 character of the tentacles, establish it as a peculiar type. The 

 distinction between the Belemnites and Belemnoteuthis is too ob- 

 vious to demand further notice ; no one, I presume, will again 

 mistake an osselet of the latter for the phragmocone of the 

 former detached from the alveolus of its guard : and I would 

 fain hope that this attempt to elucidate an important palseonto- 

 logical question, will not again subject me to the imputation of 

 unamiable motives. 



I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, your faithful servant, 

 Chester Square, Pimlico, GiDEON ALGERNON ManTELL. 



June 1852. 



III. — On a supposed new species o/ Eleocharis. By Charles 

 C. Babington, M.A., F.R.S. &c.* 



My attention has been recently directed by Mr. H. C. Watson 

 to the British species of Eleocharis, and, having been led to con- 

 cur with him in the idea that there is an undescribed plant be- 

 longing to that genus which inhabits the western coast of Scot- 

 land, I purpose pointing out in this paper the respects in which 

 it differs from our known species included in the genus, and 

 adding a few remarks upon them. 



In the autumn of the year 1844, 1 had the pleasure of accom- 

 panying Professor Balfour of Edinburgh in a tour through the 

 district of Cantyre in Argyleshire. At Tayanloan, on the western 

 coast of that peninsula, he gathered two or three specimens of 

 the plant upon which this paper is founded, but did not observe 

 its difference from Scirpus pauciflorus, in company with which it 



* Read before the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, June 10, 1852. 



2* 



