107 
Porocidaris elegans Agassiz. 
Epralabirds elegans Agissiz,, Proc. Amer. Acad., xiv, 1879, p..198 ; 
“Challenger” Reports, iti, 1881, p. 40. 
Histocidaris elegans Mortensen, Danish Ingolf Exped: 1903, pp. 21, 30. 
Stations 83, 89. 
This little Gidea has hitherto been obtained off Sydney and the 
Philippines, and its discovery in considerable numbers off New Zea- 
land has much interest. 
The only difference that I can detect, from the abbreviated account 
in the “ Challenger” report (for I have not access to the earlier de- 
scription), is the fact that there is in our specimens no crenulation on 
the boss of the tubercles. Wyville Thomson [36] pointed out, and 
Agassiz gives further evidence, that cases are known in which some 
individuals of a species usually having crenulated tubercles have 
smooth bosses. Also, both in P.. purpurata Thomson and P. elegans, 
only some of the tubercles exhibit this feature. As our specimens are 
all smaller than those obtained by the “ Challenger,” their absence 
may be due to immaturity. In all other respects, however, the agree- 
ment is so close that I do hot feel justified in making a new species. 
This little cidarid is readily distinguished from our other member 
of the family, not only by the greater length and delicacy of the 
spines, the length of which is 2 to 3 times the diameter of the corona, © 
but by the peculiar flattened pectimate spines around the mouth. 
Our specimens are smaller than those described by Agassiz. Height, 
10 mm. ; diameter, 19 mm. ; plates, 6 in a vertical row. 
I have followed Agassiz in rejecting Mortensen’s generic name. 
Localities.—Cape Kidnappers, 76-82 fathoms, soft mud ; Cape Run- 
away, 105 fathoms, sand and mud: both on the east coast of the 
North Island. 
Echinus angulosus Leske. 
Farquhar, loc. cit., 1898, p. 319. 
Parechinus angulosus Mortensen, loc. cit., 1903, p. 108. 
Plate XI, fig. 5. 
Station 29. 
There are two specimens of an echinid which I attribute, with 
some hesitation, to this species, for the following reasons: (a.) The 
species is already recorded from New Zealand by Agassiz (1872, p. 490). 
(b.) There are several examples from Stewart Island in this Museum, 
so labelled by Captain Hutton. (c.) There is a fairly close resemblance 
between them and the photograph of Hchinus angulosus given in 
Agassiz’s “ Revision,” pl. vii a. 
At the same time I feel doubtful as to the correctness of this identifi- 
cation, for—(1.) A detailed comparison with Agassiz’s account of the 
arrangement of the tubercles in #. angulosus shows several differences ; 
