1862.] 



MORRIS AND ROBERTS CARBONIFEROFS LIMESTONE. 



Of Gasteropoda we have only seen Euomphalus pentangulatus. 



The Crustacea are as poorly represented ; one imperfect specimen of 

 Phillipsia mucronata, from the lower beds, being our sole illustration. 



Bryozoan remains are numerous, though they appear to be con- 

 fined within the narrow limits of the crinoidal band. Several species 

 of Fenestella make a seeming confusion upon some surfaces in this 

 bed, by the wildness and luxuriance of their growth ; of these, the 

 commonest are Fenestella plebeia and F. Morrisii. Associated with 

 them is the elegantly sculptured Vincularia megastoma, and some 

 ■other slightly branching Bryozoa. 



No well-defined remains of Crinoidece have been found, although 

 one band of rock appears to be made up of the separated ossicula 

 and pelvic plates of these animals, chiefly referable to Poteriocrinus 

 gracilis, CyatJiocrinus macrocheirus, and C. quinquangularis. 



The fish-remains tabulated below, and contrasted with those from 

 the Mountain Limestone of other districts, though numerous, do not, 

 as we believe, exhaust the series. Some of the smaller forms of 

 Helodus and Psammodus, unrepresented in the Oreton column of the 

 annexed Table, probably occur in those Hmestones, but we are unable 

 at present to verify this assumption. 



In concluding our remarks, we have to express regret that the 

 distance and the difficulty of removing the large collection liberally 

 offered us for study by Mr. Weaver Jones prevent us now entering 

 upon other questions of interest connected with the relative value of 

 the palseontological contents of this interesting locality; for we 

 see in this, as in other instances, the possibility of giving decisions 

 of value, by carefully elaborating the treasured-up systems of organic 

 life preserved by a single district. 



Table sTwwing the Geographical Range of the Fishes of the Mountain- 

 Limestone. 



[Note. — The materials of this Table are derived from the following authori- 

 ties : the British species from Agassiz and M'Coy ; the Belgian from De Koninck ; 

 and the Russian from those cited by E. d'Eichwald in his 'Lethaea Rossica,' 

 1861. The column for Ireland is chiefly made up from the Armagh specimens, 

 and includes the new species with MS. unpublished names contained in the 

 cabinet of the Earl of Enniskillen, upon which it is the intention of Professor 

 Agassiz to publish papers ; and also those, from the Lower Carboniferous rocks, 

 cited by M'Coy. The column for North Britain refers to the Lower Carboni- 

 ferous rocks of Westmoreland, Northumberland, and Scotland.] 





Oreton 



and 

 Farlow. 



Bristol. 



Yorkshire 



and 



Derbyshire. 



Ireland 



(chiefly 



Armagh). 



North 

 Britain. 



Acrolepis Hopkinsii, M' Coy . . . 

 Asteroptychius omatus, Ay. . . . 

 Carcharopsis prototypus, Ay.... 

 Portlockii, Ay. ... 



♦ 



^ 



■X- 



* 



* 

 'if 



» 



semiomatus. M' Coy 



Characodus angulatus, Ay 



cuneatus. Ay 



Cheirodus pes-ranse, M'Coy ... 

 Chomatodus cinctus, Ag 









h2 



