202 CONTHIBUTIONS TO CANADIAN PALyEONTOLU(;Y. 



specimen it; forty mm. high and twenty eight mm. in its maximum breath. 

 Ill the central portion of this specimen the dimensions of the rays of the 

 ' spiicides,' as measured fi-om the centre of each ' spicule,' are as follows ; 

 length uf the proximal rays, 3-5 mm., length of the horizontal or lateral 

 rays Ti-y nnn. ; thickness of the rays at theii- bases 9 mm. The dimensions 

 of the four basal plates shown in tigs o and 5a are, length 4-.") nnn., 

 breadth .'3-0 mm. The subcylindrical specimen i-cpresented ))y iig. 4 is 

 rather more than 'M) mm. in height, and 12-5 mm. in its greatest breadth.'' 



This species is the type of Pengelly's genus Sjilnrro.yioni/in, which was 

 first characterized in 1861, and of Ferdinand Roemei-'s genus Fo/ij(/oiwx- 

 ph(Tri/i's, which was published iji 1880. It is still doubtful which of 

 these names should be retained, the first having been given on the hypo- 

 thesis tliat the organism was originally a sponge, and the second on the 

 assumption that it was not. Of late years Phillips' species has been 

 referred to Sjilia-rnspompd by Dr. G. J. Hinde in 1884 (op. cit.) and by 

 Dr. Clemens 8chluter in 18S7*, Ijut to I'oliiijiiiiosjtliivritea by Zittel in 

 1883|, and by Herr Rauff|, as well as by Pnjfcssors Nicholson and 

 Lyddeker in 1889^. Dr. Hinde claims that it is a Lyssakine Hexactinel- 

 lid sponge, but Herr Rauff maintains that it and tlie Rece])taculitida^ are 

 not silici(]us organisms, but that their skeletons were originally calcai'eous 

 and the silicious specimens mere pseudomorphs, or the result of subse- 

 quent silicification. The group therefore, he concludes, cannot be referred 

 to the Hexactinellid sponges, and its systematic position is still entirely 

 uncertain. In the present Report, ]io\ve\'er, the generic term Splui'rosjiDii- 

 f/ia is still retained, though not without some hesitation, on the ground 

 that the hypothesis that the type of the genus was not a sponge, has not 

 yet been conclusively proved. 



A specimen of a SplurrD^pomjid. which appears to be indistinguishable 

 from the present species, has been figured under the name ;S'. rDrmu'djiiir, 

 Goldfuss (i^p.)ll by Dr. Schluter, who states that it was i-ecorded (aufge- 

 fiihrt) by Goldfuss in 1832 as occuri'ing in the Devonian rocks of the Eifel 

 and named by him >Scijj>hiii. comiu-iijiut'. The \-olunu^ in which the latter- 

 name was first indicated is inaccessible to the writer, but it would seem 

 that the species was never p>roperly characterized l)y Goldfuss, and hence 

 that his specific name cannot be accepted as prior to Phillips', for, on page 

 30 of Da\idson's Monograph of tlie British I)evonian Brachiopoda the 

 following passage occurs. "In l,s:',3 " (acc(_irding to Di-. Schlutei- this 



* Zeitschr. der Duutsch. t'c.J. Gfc«ell»cli., Berlin, vol. XXXIX, ]>. l.S, pi. 1, figs. 1 

 and 2. 



f Handbuch dur J'abeontolD^^ie, vol. ], p. 72S. 



X Zcitsclir. der Dcutsch. geol. (ieaellneli., JVrlin, vol. XL, p. OOl). 



§ Man. Palffiont., IKSO, vol. IT, App., pp. lUV.i-M. 



II Zeitschr. der Deutsoh. geol. (iesellsoh., 1,S87, vol. XXXIX, )il. 1, tig.s, 1 and 2. 



