275 
An Encrinite with twenty rays is mentioned by M. Schulz : 
but Mr. W alch, although unwilling to doubt the fidelity of 
the description given by M. Schulz, remarks that it is pos- 
sible that the arms of the common encrinus, or stone-lily, 
might have been reckoned after their division, and thus the 
real number might have been doubled. The probability of 
this will be allowed, when it is considered that the imper- 
fect state of a specimen often occasions very deceptive ap- 
pearances ; and this probability will be still more readily 
admitted, on considering the formation of the cap encrinite, 
Plate XV. Fig. 9? in which, from the irregularity and the 
greater frequency of the subdivision of its limbs, the animal 
might be supposed, by an inspection of its superior part 
only, to have possessed double the number of arms which 
it really does. 
The appearances presented by the polished slab of marble, con- 
taining the pentacrinite of M. Gmelin, hardly at all differ 
from those which present themselves in the pentacrinital 
marble of Dorsetshire. 
Of the supposed pentacrinite, discovered by M. D'Annone in 
a piece of the calcareous stone of Pappenheim, little posi- 
tive can be said. Since only the terminating branches and 
no part of the trunk of this animal was discovered, it is 
impossible to determine whether it should be considered as 
an encrinite, pentacrinite, or fossil Stella marina; but from 
the very close resemblance which it bears to the Stella 
SsKoiKVTii^oc barhata sen fimbriata Barrellieri, figured by Linck, 
Tab. XXXVII. Fig. 64, as well as to others of the Stella 
Crinita, there appears to be very strong reason for sup- 
posing this fossil to be the remains of some of these species 
of Stellae. 
The Encrinite described by Dr. Capeller, and mentioned in 
