Reviews—R. Etheridge, jun.— Fossils of N. S. Wales. 81 
species are few, HEchinoidea being represented by two, Asteroidea 
by three, and Crinoidea by at most fifteen; while individuals are 
also rare, with the unprofitable exception of crinoid stem-ossicles, 
which, here as elsewhere, form large beds of Entrochal Marble. 
The chief Echinoid specimen has been much damaged by fire, but 
enough remains to show a feature of some interest. “The rows of 
plates in each inter-ambulacral area are certainly four, but in the 
middle line of the three best preserved areas, between the two 
contiguous rows of tubercle-bearing plates, are smaller pieces devoid 
of tubercles.” This species seems to connect Archgocidaris, which 
it otherwise resembles, with those allied genera that have more than 
four rows of interambulacrals: and when better specimens are 
known, it will probably form the type of a new genus. At present it 
is called Archgocidaris? Selwyni. This and an undetermined species 
of Archzocidaris come from the Upper Marine Series of the Permo- 
Carboniferous. 
Australian starfish of the periods in question were formerly 
represented only by Palgaster Clarkei, De Kon. To this are now 
added two new species, P. Stutchburii and P. gigunteus. In all 
these species, nearly the whole of the actinal surface of each 
ray is taken up by the ambulacral and ad-ambulacral plates, while 
the marginal plates are small and sub-dorsal, not actinal as in the 
true Palzaster. Mr. Htheridge, therefore, distinguishes these species 
by the new sub-generic name of Monaster. Palzeozoic starfish are, 
however, in such a state of confusion that he would be bold who 
should predict whether or no this name will meet with final accept- 
ance. ‘These Asteroidea all occur in the Lower Marine Series, and 
P. Clarkei also in the Upper Marine Series, of the Permo-Carboni- 
ferous. 
Among the Crinoidea are recorded numerous very doubtful frag- 
ments, such as plates of a species referred by De Koninck to 
Actinocrinus polydactylus, which are probably nothing of the kind; 
an internal cast supposed by Mr. Htheridge to belong to Periecho- 
erinus, and actually named P. indicator as denoting the presence of 
that genus in Australia, a name which we cannot help thinking will 
turn out to be of the lucus a non lucendo type; some plates doubt- 
fully referred to Platycrinus; some plates provisionally referred by 
De Koninck to Poteriocrinus tenuis, Miller, and Poteriocrinus radiatus, 
Austin, species which have since been relegated to Scytalecrinus and 
Parisocrinus respectively, and cannot, therefore, indicate the presence 
of Poteriocrinus as Mr. Etheridge seems to think ; and finally several 
stem-fragments, which the author is kind enough to leave unnamed. 
Mr. Ktheridge has met with no specimen of the interesting 
Symbathocrinus ogivalis described by De Koninck, nor is any 
other instance of the genus recorded from Australia. We may, 
therefore, take this opportunity of mentioning that the dorsal cup 
of an allied species, from the Irwin River, W. Australia, has been 
sent home by Mr. H. P. Woodward, and will, it is hoped, be 
described in this Magazine. 
Some plates referred to Platycrinus are said to be “ornamented 
DECADE III.—VOL. X.—NO. Il. 6 
