by Rev. T. R. R. Stebbing. 69 
stouter than in the other species. Between this and the tooth near 
the finger-hinge the border is undulating with two small depressions. 
This character is uniform in a detached gnathopod, and in both 
members of the pair in each of two specimens. And here it may be 
noticed that these limbs of unwieldy size are well matched, not being 
a giant and a dwarf side by side, as so often happens when a gnathopod 
is of abnormal magnitude. The wrist appears to be entirely absorbed 
in the enormous hand. As in the type species, the second joint of 
the first perseopod is strongly bent proximally, no doubt to enable the 
limb to get a place in the sun free from its overpowering neighbour. 
A young specimen of the male shows the emargination of the palm 
border in the first gnathopods, but in the second the outermost tooth 
of that border is small, and the remainder nearly the same as in 
Walker’s figure of the hand in the young male of C. megacheles. 
Here there is no more distinction of the wrist than in the adult, and 
the proportions of length and breadth are similar; the finger is 
apically acute, the bluntness in adult stages being possibly due to usage. 
The small third uropods are single-branched, the endopod being 
doubtfully represented by what looks like, and may possibly be, a 
minute spine. The exopod is tipped with a small spine and some 
setee, and there are three spines on the inner margin. No stress can 
be laid on this detail, since Walker shows only one spine on the 
border in question, while Giles gives it four or five spines in his figure. 
The adult specimens had a length between three and four millimetres, 
but were difficult to measure, the one having the dorsal line very convex 
and the other having it very concave. 
Locality: Mr. Bell Marley reports these and many other specimens 
“from large Cerao chalinus sponge washed up from Vetch’s pier rocks 
during gale, 18th July, 1917 (18 to 20 feet depth), Durban coast.” 
The species is named out of respect to my valued friend, A. O. 
Walker, F.L.S., who instituted the genus. 
Cheiriphotis durbanensis, Barnard, 1916, published without illus- 
trative figures, had escaped my notice. Upon subsequent comparison 
I expected to find that it anticipated the species above described from 
the same locality, but on comparing the details of the antenne and 
gnathopods, I think that the species are distinct. 
Famity PODOCERID A. 
See Das Tierreich, Lief. xxi, pp. 694, 741; 1906, 
