340 F. B. Cowper Beed — Salter's Undescribecl Species. 



the broader end. The upper edge appears to be curved over. 

 The total length of the specimen is about 70 mm., and the width 

 at the broader end about 35 mm. It appears possible that it may be 

 really the crushed ventral shield of a Scaphaspis (Gyathaspis) . The 

 ornamentation is somewhat similar, and an obliquely crushed 

 specimen of Scaphaspis ludensis ^ which occurs on the same horizon 

 and at the same locality would present a somewhat similar appearance. 

 But it is even very doubtful to what group we should properly assign 

 this ill-defined and unsatisfactory fossil. 



Favospongia Goughi, Salter. 



1854. Undetermined fossil, McCoy : Brit. Pal. Foss., pi. i d, figs. 9, 9a. 



1873. Fasceolus Gouglii, Salter: Cat. Camb. Sil. Foss. Woodw. Mus., p. 175 {h 53, 



b 54 : reference to McCoy's figures). 

 1878. Sponge (?) : Cat. Camb. Sil. 'Foss. Mus. Pract. Geol., p. 128. 



1887. Favospongm Euthveni (Salter MS.), G. J. Hinder Brit. Foss. Sponges 



(Palseont. Soc), pt. ii, p. 179. 



1888. Favospongia Ruihveni, Etheridge: Cat. Brit. Foss., pt. i, p. 2. 

 1888. Fasceohis GougM, Etheridge: ibid., p. 2. 



1888. Fasceolus Gouglii: Mem. Geol. Surv. Geology of Kendal, etc., 2nd ed.. 

 Table ii, p. 60 (specimens in Kendal and Woodwardian Museums 

 from Kirkby Moor Flags of Benson Knot) . 



1891. Fasceolus Gouglii, "Woods: Cat. Type Foss. Woodw. Mus., p. 2. 



1897. Fasceolus Goughi, Eoemer : Lethaea Geognostica, Th. i, Bd. 1, p. 296. 



There are four specimens of this form labelled by Salter 6 53, h 54, 

 all of which are from the Kirkby Moor Flags of Benson Knot. 

 They were figured by McCoy (op. cit. supra) as an " undetermined 

 fossil," but not described by him. Salter, in his Catalogue (loc. cit. 

 supra), places McCoy's figures in the margin opposite the reference 

 to these specimens which he calls Fasceolus Goughi, and merely 

 notes that " the genus has been described by Billings from Canada." 

 McCoy had only remarked in the reference to the figures on his plate 

 that the fossil was common in the Upper Ludlow rocks of Kendal. 



Dr. Hinde (op. cit. supra), in mentioning the problematical 

 Favospongia Buthveni, refers to these figures given by McCoy as 

 representing this latter species, but does not state that they were 

 designated Fasceolus Goughi by Salter in 1873. 



There has thus been considerable confusion about this form. In 

 the first place, our Woodwardian Museum specimens are undoubtedly 

 those figured by McCoy in 1854 and referred to by Salter in 1873 

 as Fasceolus Goughi ; secondly, the name Favospongia Buthveni 

 appears first, as Dr. Hinde informs me, in John Morris' own 

 interleaved copy of his ''Catalogue of British Fossils" (ed. 1854) 

 as a manuscript entry in Morris' own hand on an interleaf amongst 

 the Amorphozoa in the following way : — 



" Favospongia, Salter, 1861. 

 Danbjii, Tetragonis. 

 Euthveni, Salt. : M.G.S., p. 136. 



Pal. Fo. W. M., PL i d, fig. 9." 



This entry is apparently meant to record the occurrence of 

 Favospongia Buthveni and Tetragonis Danhji (the latter of which 



I Lankester: Mon. Old Bed Sandst. Fishes (Palicont. Soc), 1868, p. 25, pi. ii, 

 figs. 4, 4ff. 



