54 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. VII, January, 1953 
are minor and to be expected in the normal 
range of variation. 
The varietal name refers to the few spines 
found on the merus of the large cheliped. 
relationship: This form and the next four 
described are apparently closely related to 
each other, to the species C. hailstonei (Cou- 
tiere), and to its two tentative varieties de- 
scribed by de Man, C. hailstonei assimulans and 
C. hailstonei laetahilis. De Man was not sure of 
the separation of his forms from the parent 
form described by Coutiere, as the differences 
between them, although distinct, were rather 
minor. Similarly, these five forms differ from 
the previously described forms and from each 
other on minor but distinct points. 
It is likely, therefore, that when sufficient 
intact specimens of these and the previous 
varieties are available and when the variation 
in a large population is studied it will be nec- 
essary to consolidate this and de Man’s varie- 
ties, and perhaps the following species as well, 
into the species described by Coutiere. But, 
on the other hand, it may be necessary to 
raise this and the previous varieties to specific 
rank. However, with only a few specimens 
available, it appears to me that the separation 
given in this paper is for the present the most 
wise, as this form is separated from C. hail- 
stonei and the other varieties by only more 
minor characteristics, and the other forms, de- 
scribed as new species, by greater differences 
in more important characteristics. 
Table 2 facilitates the separation of these 
eight species and varieties. The characteristics 
given are not all of equal worth for the sep- 
aration of the species. Eor example, little if 
any faith can be placed upon the minor vari- 
ations found in the relative lengths of the 
carpal articles, except in C. hrachymerus, or in 
the length of the rostrum, except possibly in 
C. tuthilli. 
As can be seen from the table, this variety 
differs from C. hailstonei hailstonei and from C. 
hailstonei laetahilis chiefly in the number of 
spines on the margins of the merus of the 
large chela, and from C. hailstonei hailstonei and 
from C. hailstonei assimulans in the nature of 
the dactylus of the third legs. Other differ- 
ences noted in the table are of more variable 
characteristics and therefore are of lesser 
worth. 
DISTRIBUTION: One of the positively iden- 
tified specimens has its collection data given 
above; the other was collected by the "Alba- 
tross” at Station 3868 in Pailolo Channel be- 
tween Molokai and Maui at 294-684 fathoms 
(U. S. N. M. 63535). Other specimens, with 
only one or several appendages attached or 
with the appendages loose in the bottle so 
that identification was more uncertain, were 
collected as follows: 
"Albatross” Station 3847 (U. S. N. M. 
63528) : South coast of Molokai, 23-24 
fathoms; 17 specimens, 14 of which are 
completely lacking thoracic legs. 
"Albatross” Station 3872 (U. S. N. M. 
63532): Auau Channel between Maui 
and Lanai, 32-43 fathoms; 1 specimen, 
lacking large chelae, second legs, and 
some of posterior legs. 
"Albatross” Station 3875 (U. S. N. M. 
63527): Auau Channel between Maui 
and Lanai, 65-34 fathoms; 2 specimens. 
"Albatross” Station 4128 (U. S. N. M. 
63531): Data as given for type; 3 other 
fragmentary specimens. 
Other specimens from the "Albatross” col- 
lection which undoubtedly belong to this 
complex and were identified by Coutiere as 
C. hailstonei (MS.), but which are too badly 
broken to permit me to even guess as to their 
identity, were collected as follows: 
"Albatross” Station 3809 (U. S. N. M. 
63533): South coast of Oahu, 51-125 
fathoms; 1 specimen. 
"Albatross” Station 3982 (U. S. N. M. 
63534): Near Kauai, 40-233 fathoms; 1 
specimen. 
"Albatross” Station 4055 (U. S. N. M, 
63530): Northeast coast of Hawaii, 50- 
62 fathoms; 1 specimen. 
