414 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 



itself was Hybodont. Mr Garman, however, in his paper 

 on Chlamydoselachus, disputes that view, and claims that 

 remarkable recent shark which has only one dorsal fin, 

 and no spines at all — a form placed by Dr Gtinther in 

 the family ISTotidanidse — to be the modern representative 

 of the ancient Cladodonts. It is perfectly true that the 

 small teeth towards the angles of the mouth in Chlamydo- 

 selachus, when seen from the front, strongly resemble 

 those of Clccdodus, yet this resemblance is not very 

 apparent in those which cover the greater part of the 

 jaws, while the bases of the teeth are to my eye strikingly 

 dissimilar. I cannot, therefore, without further evidence, 

 accept Mr Garman's very confident assertion that Chlamydo- 

 selachus is a Cladodont, leading as it does to the inference that 

 Cladodus had no dorsal spines. That Cladodus at all events 

 is not quite so close to Chlamydoselachus as Mr Garman 

 believes, is, I think, fully shown by a remarkable specimen 

 from the Carboniferous Limestone of East Kilbride, Lanark- 

 shire, which has been lent to me for description by its 

 possessor, Mr James JSTeilson, of Glasgow.^ This specimen 

 was recovered from the quarry in separate pieces by the late 

 Mr A. Patton, who, I understand, did not feel sure that they 

 all belonged to the same specimen. However, the fragments 

 were pieced together by Mr Neilson, and after a most careful 

 scrutiny of the whole, I have come to the conclusion that 

 the fragments do belong to the same specimen, and are rightly 

 arranged. We have first a head, compressed from above 

 downwards, whose jaws are crowded with truly cladodont 

 teeth of the type of C. mirabilis, though apparently belong- 

 ing to a hitherto undescribed species. This is followed by 

 a mass of crushed and inextricably confused mass of cartil- 

 ages representing the branchial apparatus, and then come 

 two scapulo-coracoids each with a pectoral fin attached. 

 The fin of the right side is the better preserved, and shows 

 first a number of elongated radial pieces, whose bases, 

 separated from the rest by joints, are attached directly to the 



1 As I have promised to lay a detailed description of this specimen before 

 the Geological Society of Glasgow, I can only make a few general remarks 

 upon it in the present instance. 



