Marcou.] 
74 
[Nov. 7, 
of furrows on the glabella showing differences with those of Para- 
doxides, they may belong to and form a special American group of 
trilobites. Mr. Matthew, whose last works on American trilobites 
are so important says : “ of its (Olenellus) close relationship to 
Paradoxides there can be no question.” 1 
It is plain from these remarks that, (1) Olenellus is a name which 
ought to be dropped, on account of the priority of the name Ellip- 
tocephalus, and of the misleading notion that it is closely allied to 
Olenus, when on the contrary its nearest relationship is with Para- 
doxides of an older horizon ; (2) Elliptocephalus, if not retained 
for the Georgia trilobites, on account of its great similarity with 
Ellipsocephalus, ought to be replaced by Ebenezeria in honor of Dr. 
Ebenezer Emmons ; (3) the horizon of the Georgia trilobites can- 
not be confounded with the Olenus beds of Europe, but is older, be- 
ing the homotaxis and equivalent of the Paradoxides horizon. 
The genus Olenellus is comparatively rare in Conception Bay, 
in Eastern Newfoundland, where it was pointed out by Mr. Billings 
as far back as 1870, and by Mr. Matthew in 1886. 2 
Mr. Matthew insists upon the distinction between the two faunas 
of the Olenellus beds and of the Paradoxides group. He says that 
they do not mingle anywhere, and that the fauna of the St. John 
group is entirely absent in the gulf and valley of the St. Lawrence, 
where the Georgia fauna is well and typically developed from West- 
ern Newfoundland to Georgia and southward. Mr. Matthew with 
great sagacity says: “The trilobite (Paradoxides? of Conception 
Bay) is a primitive form of the Paradoxides family, which has points 
of resemblance to Parad. Kjerulfi” But he hesitates in regard to 
the horizon of that primitive form of the Paradoxides family, and 
expresses the view that “its range elsewhere [which means evidently 
J On the classification of the Cambrian rocks in Acadia (reprinted from the Ca- 
nadian Record of Science), p. 75, 1888. 
2 Both Billings and Matthew were in doubt in regarding the trilobite of Topsail 
Head, as belonging truly to the genus Paradoxides: having only small fragments at 
their disposal, they regarded them as ‘‘supposed” Paradoxides. Alexander Murray 
in his section from Topsail Head across Great Bell Isle (Report upon the geological sur- 
vey of Newfoundland for the year 1868, pp. 27 and 28, St. John’s) shows the green slates 
with Paradoxides Bennetii, underlain by strata containing Lingulae, etc., representing 
the Olenellus beds. In the report for the year 1870, at pp. 37 and 38, Murray is even 
more explicit having recognized and found at Fortune Harbor and Langlois Island the 
Paradoxides Bennetii, Concephalites, etc., and at Trinity bay and Topsail Head “a 
small fragment of supposed Paradoxides,” a Bathyurus gregarius Bil. and an archaeo- 
cyathus, all below the green slates with Paradoxides. The stratigraphic position of the 
Olenellus beds of Newfoundland has been known since 1868 and 1870, and corresponds 
harmoniously with the Olenellus bed of Scandinavia. 
