158 



Great Churchill Rivers, Keewatin, by Dr. Bell in 1879; it is represented 

 in a small collection of fossils from the vicinity of Doobaunt Lake, made 

 by Mr. Tyrrell in 1893; and a badly preserved specimen of it was 

 collected at Wekusko (Herb) Lake by Mr. Tyrrell in 1896. 



The genus Calapcecia was first proposed and defined (in 1865) by E. 

 Billings, who regarded it as consisting of three species, which he described 

 under the names C. Canadensis, C. Huronensis, and C. Anticostiensis. 

 In 1866, however, in a foot-note to page 33 of his Catalogue of the 

 Silurian Fossils of the Island of Anticosti, Mr. Billings says of Calapoecia 

 Anticostiensis that " it appears to be congeneric with Syringophyllum 

 organum, ( Sarcinula organum)." Lindstrom, in 1883, made Columno- 

 pora, Nicholson, a synonym of Calapcecia, and Nicliolson had previously 

 (in 1879) regarded Houghtonia of Rominger as a synonym of Colwmno- 

 pora. 



The writer has long been convinced that ColuTnnopora cribriformis, 

 Nicholson, is identical with Calapcecia Huronensis, and that the latter can- 

 not be satisfactorily distinguished, even as a mere stratigraphical variety, 

 from Calapcecia Canadensis. Mr. Billings admits that G. Huronensis is 

 closely allied to C. Canadensis, but claims that the former " has the 

 corallites in general more slender," and that it " presents a different 

 aspect." In the original descriptions it is stated that the corallites of 

 C. Canadensis are " about one line, usually a little more, in diameter, 

 and generally in contact though still remaining circular," but that those 

 of C. Huronensis are " somewhat less than one line in diameter, with a 

 few others much smaller between them." In one of the specimens of 

 C. Huronensis, from Cape Smyth, in the Museum of the Survey, most of 

 the corallites are certainly a little larger than those of C. Canadensis, 

 and perhaps a little farther apart, but this is not the case with other 

 specimens of C. Huronensis from the same locality. The specimens from 

 the Red River valley and Lake Winnipeg correspond almost equally well 

 with the descriptions of either, but, upon the whole, in the mere size of 

 their corallites, perhaps a little better with the character of C. Canadensis 

 than with those of C. Huronensis. 



In a letter dated October 10th, 1885, Professor Nicholson (to whom 

 one or more examples of each of the nominal species of Calapcecia had 

 been sent by the writer, for comparison with specimens of Syringo- 

 phyllum) states that he had arrived at the following conclusions in 

 regard to them : "(1.) My Columnopora cribriformis is identical, both 

 generically and • specifically, with Calapci'cia Huronensis, Billings. My 

 name must, therefore, be abandoned. It is quite probable that Calapoecia 

 Canadensis, Billings, is also the same as C. Huronensis, but, the speci- 

 mens being silicified in the former, I am not sure of this. (2.) Calapcecia 



