150 



BRITISH FOSSIL CRUSTACEA. 



" There is one example of the serrated portion of a ' maxillipede' or * endognath' which is 

 very well preserved 1 (L. 1688). See Woodcut, Fig. 46. 



Fig. 45. — Part of one of the body-segments of 

 Eurypterus Sibernicus,Bai\y ; and part of the 

 margin enlarged : Devonian, Kiltorcan. 



Fig. 46. — Serrated maxilla of one of the en- 

 dognaths of Eurypterus Mibemicus, Baily 

 (natural size and enlarged) ; Devonian, 

 Kiltorcan. 



"Another specimen appears to be the lower portion of a swimming appendage 

 'ectognath' 2 (D. 1867). 



" The chelate termination of an antenna (B. 3374) is not unlike that of one of the 

 modern Crabs, being thick and short, much curved, and provided with one or two blunt 

 tooth-like processes. 3 See Woodcut, Fig. 47. 



Figs. 47 and 48. — Chela, and detached lower ramus of chela of Crustacean, from the Devonian of Kiltorcan. 



" Another specimen (B. 3376), which would seem to be the lower ramus of an antennary 

 chela, is larger, more slender, and also much curved. 4 See Woodcut, Fig. 48. 



" These specimens being all detached fragments, it is impossible at present to state 

 with any degree of certainty the relation of one with another, or to define the species from 

 such insufficient data. I therefore merely propose the name as a provisional one. 



" Wm. Hellier Baily." 



1 This endognath or maxillipede is so peculiar in form that I cannot readily suggest a reference for it. 

 It most nearly approaches Eurypterus punctatus. 



2 I am unable to recognise the form of the ectognath or swimming-foot in this fragment, owing to the 

 distortion of the specimen. 



3 So far as I may venture to speak with certainty of such a detached specimen, I would be unwilling 

 to refer it to the Eurypterida at all. Its form is quite distinct from that of the known chelate antennae 

 belonging to this group. 



4 If this be the detached lower ramus of a chela, it very probably belongs to some Crustacean not a 

 Eurypterid. 



