E. Etheridge, Jan. — PalcBontological Notes. 269 



will he be good enough to say whether he conceives the moraine 

 profonde was or was not frozen into the base of the ice, and if so 

 frozen as to move with it, what caused the moraine to be separated 

 and left behind at any point during its descent. 



V. P AL^ ONTOLO GIC AL NOTES. 



By E. Ethekidge, jun., F.G.S. 

 (Continued from p. 119.) 



1. Arbusoulites akgentea, p. Murray (Edinb. N. Phil. Journ. 

 1831, vol. xi. p. 147). — Under the title, "Account of the Arbiis- 

 culites argentea, from the Carboniferous Limestone of Inverteil, 

 near to Kirkcaldy, in Fifeshire," a curious paper was published in 

 1831, by Dr. P. Murray, of Scarborough. The organisms are 

 described as "very delicate vermiform bodies, in fragments of 

 different lengths, shining with metallic lustre, neither articulated 

 nor cellular, and resembling broken bits of silver wire." The 

 author adds, "It would appear to have been an attached Mollusc, 

 dichotomous at first, but afterwards sending out lateral branches, 

 moderately tapering, and with very distant and obscure (if any) 

 articulations, grooved longitudinally, and composed of a bright 

 silvery cortical case, and a solid axis of carbonate of lime. ... It 

 differs decidedly from the Crinoidal animals, which are regularly 

 articulated ; and varies nearly in the same degree from the Coral- 

 lines, etc., by not displaying the cellular structure characteristic of 

 that family." Dr. Murray ultimately places this fossil amongst the 

 Corallines, selecting for it a provisional resting-place in the third 

 order of the first class of Lamouroux. 



Amongst the many fossils I have seen from Inverteil I have never 

 been able to recognize any body which would answer to Dr. Murray's 

 description and figure of Arhusculites argentea, and, so far as I am 

 aware, it has been entirely lost sight of by all subsequent writers. 

 I shall be glad if any of my fellow- workers in Carboniferous Palaeon- 

 tology, by a study of the original article, can throw any light upon 

 this obscure fossil. According to Dr. Murray's description, the 

 want of articulations and dichotomous nature separate it from the 

 Crinoidea. It may be some form of Polyzoa, but the absence of 

 cells renders it doubtful. The figure given by Dr. Murray at once 

 shows that the fossil cannot be the tubes of Annelida. The descrip- 

 tion, "resembling broken bits of silver wire," accords better, so 

 far as my knowledge of Carboniferous organisms goes, with the 

 long spines of Frodncti; but in this reference we are again con- 

 fronted with the dichotomous nature of the fragments. 



2. IcHTHYOLiTHUs Clackmannensis, Fleming (Edinb. N. Phil. 

 Journ. 1853, vol. xix. p. 314, t. 4).— The fact that Prof Fleming 

 was one of the earliest observers, although apparently subsequent 

 to Agassiz, to describe the well-known Carboniferous fish Mega- 

 licJitJiys Eibberti, appears to have been generally overlooked. His 

 paper, " Notice of the Eemains of a Fish found connected with 

 a Bed of Coal at Clackmannan," and published in 1835, makes it 

 quite clear that Dr. Fleming was perfectly well acquainted with this 

 fish under the above name, obtained " in the course of the mining 



