J > 
154 Scientific Intelligence. 
applicable to American strata carrying the first or primordial 
fauna unless Cambrian has a clear priority of usage. 
Maps were exhibited to show the distribution of the formations 
under discussion in, Vermont, Massachusetts and New York; and 
a section, crossing Washington County, N. Y., and into southern 
Vermont, gave the position of the formations in relation to each 
other. A hypothetical section, showing the formations as origi- 
nally deposited, aided materially in the elucidation of the subject. 
Specimens Hyolithes and Olenellus were shown from the 
“oranular quartz” and the interbedded limestones of the Upper 
Taconic. Cc. D. W. 
<3. Remarks on the Revision of the Paleocrinoidea of Wachs- 
muth and Springer; by C. A. Wuirr.—It has rarely happened 
that a more important paleontological work than this has been 
. published; and it is still more rare that a difficult subject has 
been more philosophically treated. The work has been published 
in parts by the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Science, ending 
with the second section of Part III. Part I, embracing the 
families Ichthyocrinide and Cyathocrinide, was published in 
1879. Part II, containing the Platycrinide, Actinocrinide and 
Rhodocrinidz appeared in 1881. Part III, of which the second 
and concluding section has just been issued, gives the conclusion 
of the family and generic descriptions, a general review in which 
are suggested some modifications of the work of preceding parta, 
and an extended discussion of the classification and relations of 
the Brachiate Crinoids. 
The authors have evidently aimed to bring into systematic 
order all existing knowledge of the paleozoic crinoids; and their 
work is therefore systematic rather than descriptive. The few 
new species which they have described are presented as illustra- 
tive of the general questions which they discuss. : 
They have from the beginning recognized the fact that the only 
way to arrive at a correct understanding of the fossil crinoids 
is by a comparative study of their living representatives. There- 
fore, the discussion of the morphological relations of the ancient 
and recent crinoids forms a conspicuous feature of their work. 
This method of treatment of the subject presents important 
zoological as well as paleontological results. 
Even in the earlier part of the work these authors recognized 
two comprehensive types among crinoids, for which they estab- 
lished the orders Palzeocrinoidea and Stomatocrinoidea; but for 
the latter they afterwards adopted the name Neocrinoidea, as 
subsequently proposed by Dr. P. H. Carpenter. The principal 
distinction between the two orders is found in the condition of 
the mouth and food grooves. In the Palzocrinoidea, these 
organs are more or less subtegminal, the food grooves along the 
dise taking the form of tubular passages, hidden beneath a 
vault; while in the Neocrinoidea the mouth and food grooves 
are open and exposed to view. 
In their broader generalizations they recognize the stalked 
