504 A. CHAMPERNOWNE ON SOME ZAPHRENTOID 
There still remains C. ceratites, Goldf., to be consulted in relation 
to this subject. To that species Edwards & Haime* referred the 
large individuals given on plate xvi. of Goldfuss as C. turbinatum ; 
but no transverse or longitudinal sections were given. The same 
authors mention “ one or two small septal fossule.” My impression 
is, that more requires to be known of C. ceratites; it may bea 
common Devonshire coral, but of this I cannot speak with 
certainty. 
My fig. 5 clearly belongs to the same species as fig. 4. It has had 
all the outer part of the calice worn down, but I have succeeded in 
developing the central part, which shows the large fossula. The 
species may provisionally be named Cyathophyllum ? bilaterale, but 
may ultimately be placed with a known form. 
Loc. A quarry in Devonian limestone and shale on the south 
bank of Tuckenhay Creek, on the Dart. 
Summary and Conclusion. 
The above descriptions of the material I have had to work upon 
are but imperfect, and in their very nature tentative; to no one 
can this statement be truer than to myself. The Devonian corals 
are difficult; they present very different aspects according to the 
condition and mode of fossilization, even of well-known species, and 
the less the number of individuals forthcoming of any form the more 
should one pause before asserting its distinctness (whatever specific 
distinctness may mean). 
But to sum up that which has been advanced, in the first place, 
with regard to the main proposition, viz. the occurrence of Za- 
phrentis in our Devonian rocks. As above hinted, there is probably 
much more material in collections than what is realized. Thus, 
since the plates were drawn, I have again looked through the 
collection of the Torquay Natural History Society, and have also had 
the advantage of seeing some Devonian corals lately presented by 
Mr. Luxmore to the British Museum, and in both cases have fully 
satisfied myself that genuine Zaphrentes are included. Whilst, 
however, affirming the fact, I do so with no intention of conveying 
the idea that it is any remarkable discovery. In fact, on @ 
priort grounds, it is no more than might well have been anticipated, 
and perhaps the wonder is that it should have hitherto escaped 
recognition. 
In the second place, there are certainly three out of the seventeen 
specimens figured which have been regarded as not strictly admis- 
sible, even as Zaphrentide, although exhibiting bilateral symmetry. 
From these being exceptions, and from my haying arrived at the 
conclusion after mature consideration, the legend of the plates was 
not altered on their account. 
This brings us to another point, viz.— What are those correlations 
of structure upon which we may best rely for a definition of the 
Zaphrentidee? We have (1) the successive complete floors, the 
* Brit. Foss. Cor. p. 224. + ‘Petrefacta Germanie.’ 
