394 NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 
the joints”’ and “that the ‘bifid’ ending of the leg on the figures does, 
in fact, not at all give the impression of two claws, but resembles closely 
the also broken end of the right leg of the last pair in the figure of Palaeo- 
phonus nuncius Thor. & Lindstr.” Other reasons are cited by 
this eminent authority on the scorpions in favor of the closer relation- 
ship of Proscorpius with Palaeophonus, notably the cylindrical character 
of the joints, while in the later scorpions the tibia is compressed and 
convex longitudinally on the under side; and, also, the comparatively 
short joints of the legs. Pocock expressed similar doubts in stating 
[1901, p. 309] that “the apical segment of the leg is simply bifid at the 
tip, a feature which may be due to fracture, or may represent a pair of 
sclerites like those borne at the tip of the distal segments of the fourth leg 
of Limulus, or may be explained on the supposition that the end 
segment terminated in a sharp point as in Palaeophonus, and was 
furnished near the tip with a movable spine or spur.’’ Pocock further 
points out “that there is no agreement between Scudder and Whitfield 
as to whether the segment stated to possess these claws is numerically 
the third or sixth from the base,” and that further discussion of the mat- 
ter is therefore idle. According to Scudder’s interpretation the claws 
would be at the end of the third or fourth segment and are therefore not 
to be compared with the tarsal claws of other scorpions which were at 
the seventh joint. 
Fritsch has raised the same objections as Thorell to Whitfield’s and 
Scudder’s view of the presence of two terminal claws, considering them 
as due to the wrong interpretation of fragments and pointing out that 
the tarsal joints which would carry the claws, must be much smaller. 
The disagreement between two such trained observers as Scudder and 
Whitfield as to the number of joints is probably the best proof of the very 
unfavorable state of preservation of the leg in question, which, in fact, 
is in its distal portion but a faint impression, precluding positive asser- 
tions. Our view is that only the articulations drawn in by Scudder are 
such, since along them the joints are slightly set off, one of the other lines 
