6 Dr. F. If. Stnpff— Crystalline Schists 



consideration show the small pineal plate (" posterior ethmoid " of 

 Traquair) fused with the large ethmoid (-'anterior ethmoid" of 

 Traquair) in front, but separated by a distinct sutural line. The 

 great pineal pit at tlie hinder angle of the " rostral " plate thus 

 formed is well indicated in PI. I. Fig. 8. 



Several plates of the body cuirass are also contained in the latest 

 collection from Campbellton. There are examples of the lateral and 

 ventrolateral plates (Whiteaves, loc. cit. pi. ix. figs. 3, 4) ; and two 

 groups of smaller, sparsely tuberculated plates cannot even be 

 provisionally determined. Farther discoveries must be awaited 

 before any definite information concerning the disposition of the 

 armature is obtainable. 



EXPLANATION^ OF PLATE I. 

 Fish-remains from the Lower Devonian of Campbellton, New Brunswick. 



Fig. 1. Protodus Jexi, sp. nov. ; tooth, outer and lateral (la) aspects. 



,, 2. Liplodus problematkus, sp. nov. ; tooth, outer aspect, three times nat. size. 



,, 3. Acanthodes semistriatus, sp. nov. ; tin-spine. 



„ 4. Gyracanthus incur vus, Traq. ; spine, lateral aspect. 



,, 5. Ditto ; abraded apex of spine, lateral aspect. 



,, 6. Cephalaspis campbelltoycensis, Whiteaves sp. ; scale, external aspect, three 

 times natural size. 



,, 7. Thhjctcenaspis acadica, Whiteaves sp. ; head-shield, external aspect. 

 c. central; e. ethmoid; e.o. external occipital ; m. marginal; m.o. median 

 occipital ; p. pineal ; p.mx. premaxilla ; p.o. preorbital ; pt.o. post- 

 orbital. 



„ 8. Ditto ; ethmoidal [e) and pineal [p) plates, visceral aspect. 



All the specimens are preserved in the Geological Department of the British 

 Museum (Natural History), and, unless otherwise stated, the drawings are of the 

 natural size. 



II. — Remarks on Prof. Bonnet's paper "On the Crystalline 

 Schists and their Eelation to the Mesozoic Eocks in the 

 Lepontine Alps." 



By Dr. F. M, Stapff. 



IVENTUEE to offer some remarks on the above-mentioned paper 

 of Prof. Bonney, which appeared in the Quarterly Journal of 

 the Geological Society for May, 1890 (vol. xlvi. pp. 187-240).' As 

 the result of ten years' geological researches in the St. Gothard 

 district, I have become familiar with most of the statements and 

 arguments brought forward by Prof. Bonney ; many of them, I am 

 glad to see, agree with my own observations and views, already made 

 known in ofiScial and other publications; others, however, I feel 

 bound to dispute. 



I- — The hlacJc schists. — Prof. Bonney's view that the " blach garnet 

 schists " of the St. Gothard (Nufenen to Lukmanien) are not identi- 

 cal with the belemnitiferous black '' spottecV schists of the ISufeneii 

 (Bonney, I.e. pp. 214, 218, 220, 221) has been held by me since 



' It will, we are sure, gratify our readers to learn that Dr. StapfF, the writer 

 of the present article, was the eminent engineer of the St. Gothard tunnel. By 

 accident Prof. Bonney has referred to him in the Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. 1890. 

 vol. xlvi. p. 196, as "the late Dr. Stapf " (for Stapf read Staplf). We are glad to 

 be able to state that Dr. Stapff is alive and well. — Edit. Geol. Mag. 



