282 Transactions. — Zoology. 



single tube with an outer door (of the wafer kind). One nest (fig. 6, pi. 

 viii.), indeed, has a branch, but there is no inner door connected with it ; 

 and from its position and character I feel little doubt that, at first, it formed 

 part of the main tube, but owing to some cause or other — perhaps from 

 filling or choking up — it became useless, and then the spider continued its 

 nest in another direction. I have had an instance of this, not long since, 

 in a tube of Atypus sidzeri, Bl., found in the Isle of Wight, and, more 

 recently still, in several found at Bloxworth, and also others from Hamp- 

 stead near London. 



It appears that the only example of the clouhle-door branched type of nest 

 observed in New Zealand was not found by Mr. Grillies himself,* but by one 

 of his servants. I am, therefore, inclined to believe that there has been a 

 mistake in regard to its having been the nest belonging to one of the female 

 senders sent to me by Captain Hutton ; for all of these spiders are certainly 

 identical with those found in nests of the other type identified by Mr. 

 Gillies himself, and received since from Captain Hutton. In absence of 

 the clearest proof to the contrary, I take it that the different types of nest 

 furnish decided characters of conclusive specific value. This, at least, is 

 the result of the long and careful observations made in the south of France 

 by the late Mr. Moggridge, all of whose materials, both spiders and nests, 

 are in my possession, and have been the subject of repeated consideration 

 and examination. 



From Mr. Gillies' remarks (I.e., p. 226), he does not appear to have 

 seen any nest with a true cork-door. All those found in New Zealand, as 

 yet, are evidently of the ivafer-Ud kind ; lids of this kind vary a good deal 

 in their thickness, but cannot be mistaken for a moment for the true cork- 

 lid, which fits into the opening of the tube as into a socket; while the 

 wafer -lid shuts upon or over the opening ; although in some species there 

 is a portion of the middle of the lid which may enter slightly into the 

 orifice. 



With regard to the enlargements in the nest, I do not think this of specific 



* There seems to be some little confusion, however, here in Mr. Gillies' paper. 

 Compare p. 225, lines 3-9, from top of page, with p. 227, lines 4-7, and p. 260, lines 

 5-10. 



From a letter received from Mr. Gillies since this paper was printed, I understand 

 that the confusion alluded to was occasioned by the misprint (p. 227, line 6 from the top) 

 of a figure 1 instead of 6. This does not, however, remove my conviction that I have 

 not yet seen the spider by which the nest delineated in fig. 1, pi. viii, was constructed. 

 Mr. Gillies tells me that some of the spiders captured by him were sent to Paris and 

 others to Dr. Filhol ; it is therefore possible that among these may have been the 

 maker of the nest alluded to, as well as the example with a " peculiarly large and broad 

 cephalo-thorax," See Mr. Gillies' paper, p. 225, and my observation on it, posteap. 283. 



