ON FOSSIL POLTZOA. 259 



Many valuable foliaceous types are in the cabinet of Mr. Longe, and 

 a few are in the Musenm of the School of Mines, and in the Cambridge 

 Museum. Some few of Mr. Louge's specimens I have been allowed to ex- 

 amine, and I have five species in my own cabinet. These I have examined 

 both in the mass and in sections before drawing up the details furnished 

 in this report. It is high time that a monograph of British Jurassic 

 Polyzoa should be undertaken by some competent authority before the 

 masses of material at present in the hands of private collectors are again 

 scattered, as previous collections have been, without note or comment. 

 Besides my own specimens I have examined many in the cabinets of 

 Mr. Walford and his friends. If these could be compared with the type 

 specimens named by Haime, a more valuable addition to Paleontology 

 could be made than we at present possess. In the work of Professor 

 Phillips, ' Geology of the Valley of the Thames, 1871,' it is painful to 

 read his remarks on the Polyzoa of the various formations laid bare in 

 the valley. Speaking of Liassic Polyzoa, he says, ' specimens have been 

 observed at Fenny Compton.' Of the Infei'ior Oolite, ' Insufficiently 

 examined in the series.' In the Great Oolite only four species are given 

 — Alecto dichotoma ; Cricopora straminea, Phill. ; Diastopora diluviana, and 

 Terehellaria ramosissima. 



Of the Oxford Oolitic Period, Phillips says, ' The rarity of Polyzoa in 

 the Oxford Oolites and Clays is somewhat remarkable, and appears to 

 be in some way related to the even more remarkable rarity of Brachio- 

 poda, on whose shells in the Bath Oolites so many of these beautiful 

 objects ai'o found.' ' In the Cretaceous system (p. 434), a list of nearly 

 fifty species of Polyzoa is given by the author as occurring in the valley 

 of the Thames. 



I have before me a very valuable series of notes compiled by Mr. 

 Walford, on species of Polyzoa found in his own neighbourhood. If other 

 students would undertake to furnish notes of a similar character of other 

 localities, a compilation of the range of types would be easily made. As it 

 is we have insufficient data and ill-digested identifications to deal with. 



1821. Genus Spiropora, Lamouroux. 



1822. Intricaria, Defranc. 1830. Cricopora, Blainville. 1840. MEir— 

 CERITITES, Roeraer. 1850. Entalophora, D'Orbigny. 1853. Cricopora, 

 Spiropora, Tubigera,Mei,iceritites, Laterotubigera, Entalophora, D'Orb. 

 Palaeontology. 



I have already vindicated by use and preference the retention of this 

 genus for species of Palaeozoic Polyzoa.^ I still retain the name for 

 species of the genus very common in the Mesozoic rocks. I have also 

 given the synonyms with their dates of genera intended to supersede 

 Lamouroux's original term. It may be as well to define and limit the 

 genus as applicable for the reception ofPalaeozoic, Mesozoic, and Cainozoic 

 species. I am not aware that any recent species of Polyzoa can be in- - 

 eluded in the group. 



' Zoarium dendroid with dichotomous branches. Zocecia elongated,, 

 closely connected laterally, but less distinct at the base, perforated with, 

 very small and round pores . . . Peristomes circular, more or less pro- 



' Pp. 123, 239, 302. 



^ 'Notes on the Wenlock Polyzoa,' Quart. Jour, of Geo, Soc. February 1882, 

 pp. 43-68. 



S2 



