G. R. Vine—Carboniferous Polyzoa. 503 
are almost always present in the Carboniferous species. I there- 
fore, prefer to leave the Flustra? which Phillips describes with 
Ptilodictya as P. parallela, Phill., and this reference is founded upon 
original investigation of various specimens of Ptilodictya, of the 
American Silurian species,' Ptilodictya Meeki, Nicholson, Devonian 
Species,” as well as all the known species of Sulcoretepora of the 
Carboniferous Limestone series. 
The Millepora of Lamarck seems to have been the generic type of 
both Goldfuss and Phillips, and in describing the Carboniferous 
species, the latter author adopted the class Polypiaria of the Radiate 
Division of the Animal Kingdom at that time current among 
naturalists. It was Phillips’s misfortune, rather than his fault, that 
he had to follow in his classification the authority of those who 
preceded him. Of the six species of Millepora described, four are 
easily identified—the other two are not so easily recognized, 
Millepora rhombifera, Phill., Geol. of Yorkshire. 
aA interporosa 4, rp 5) 
Re spicularis a3 oa +: 
” oculata ” »? ” 
ie gracilis », Paleozoic Foss. of Devon, ete. 
a similis Torquay. 
AE verrucosi, Goldfuss. Of this Phillips says, ‘a species like 
this appears at Florence Court, Ireland.’’ $ 
No group of Polyzoa, recent or fossil, has caused so much trouble 
to paleontologists as the little group here tabulated from Phillips. 
Members of it have been referred to no fewer than five distinct 
genera, and even now they may be safely referred to three, if not 
to four. Rather than postpone the analysis of the species, I shall 
prefer to draw upon later work, and do it here instead of elsewhere. 
Millepora gracilis is referred to by Phillips in his later work,* for 
he seems not to have noticed it in the limestone, Yoredale limestone, 
or Shales of Yorkshire; yet it is most common everywhere, whilst 
the M. rhombifera is by far the rarer species. We have the authority 
of Phillips himself, that the species I am dealing with were his; for 
in a letter which he addressed to Prof. J. Young, and Mr. J. Young, 
of Glasgow,® he says, “I agree with you in referring your beautiful 
specimens to the three species (M. gracilis, M. rhombifera, and M. 
interporosa) named in my books (“ Yorkshire,” vol. ii. and “ Paleeo- 
zoic Foss.”). Your examples are better than mine were; but I have 
no doubt of the reference, ete.” Morris places the whole of Phillips's 
species—with the exception of M. spicularis and M. oculata—with 
the Ceriopora;? the exceptions, for what reason I cannot explain, he 
places with the Pustulopora of Blainville, a genus that had no exis- 
tence in the Paleozoic seas. 
1 Niagara Group: Hall, Paleontol. of New York, vol. ii.; Nat. Hist. New 
York, part 4. 
2 Grou. Maa., 1875, pp. 19-20, Pl. 6, Fig. 14. 
3 Geol. of Yorkshire. 4 Excepting Lepralia. 
5 Paleozoic Foss. of ‘Cornwall, Devon, etc., 1841. 
6 April 3, 1874; Ann. Mag. of Nat. Hist., May, 1875. 
7 Catalogue of British Fossils, 1854. 
