mouth of its tubicular home, and having a lip round nearly the entire circumference, and leading into a wide throat, the inner surface of which is roughly ridged. But I find no tongue, jaws, nor teeth in it. On the upper side of the head, the lip is cut, and at each end of the opening springs a very lithe and active tentacle, thick, obtuse, rounded on the upper side, furrowed beneath. The edges of this furrow can meet so as almost to form a tube. Just at the root of each tentacle is a dark spot which looks like an eye. I fail, however, to convince myself that it possesses any powers of vision, or to trace any nervous system in connection with it.

On each side of the head the golden feet, or lateral processes are nine in number, formed of bristles clothed with flesh. On the fourth of each series there is a group of bristles quite different in form and colour from the others. I should much like to know their use, as well as that of the open bag which is placed upon the back of the annelid.

Bristles I find of four distinct kinds. In the two long processes like asses' ears, and in all the segments of the tail, the bristles are long, golden, straight, plain, and taper to a plain point. In all the processes on each side of the head they are somewhat shorter, golden, straight, or very slightly curved, truncate at the inner end, and tipped at the other with an elegant "spearhead," slightly bent to the form of the process. These "spearheads" overlap each other, and must give additional strength. On the lower part of the fourth lateral head-process appears a set of different bristles, short, thick, dark-coloured, truncate at both ends, almost clubshaped. The most remarkable of the bristles are those which, placed side by side in immense numbers, form the faint brown line observable along the edges of the feet and disks beneath the body. They are comb-like, having eight sharp teeth, and are firmly embedded in the flesh by a long tendon. The teeth of the combs are turned in the direction in which the feet

respectively bearing them are required to act. The number of these little saw-teeth bristles in each Chatopterus must be enormous, for many have forty segments in the tail portion, each segment having four feet (two to work each way.) I estimate that on each foot there may be a hundred of these combs-if so, the tail portion of the annelid would bear about 16,000 of them; and the disks and lobes half as many more, perhaps.

In every tube which contains a Chatopterus, without exception, I find a parasite-an annelid which corresponds with the description of Polynöe given in Mr. Gosse's Manual. It has bristles of one sort only, (long, pointed, toothed like a saw on one edge at least.) It has antennæ and two pairs of eyes. Its segments are alternately provided with soft appendages, (in this case the appendages are alternately shieldplates and cirri.) It has two pairs of teeth or jaws in an evertile proboscis. In large tubes the parasite is large; in small ones, small. I generally find it crouching on the lower segments of the body of Chatopterus: and the earliest intimation I receive of the death of that annelid, is from the exit of the parasitical Polynöe from the tube.

Your South Carolina specimen seems to have a crab parasite.

Near these Chatopteri I find various Terebella; Cerianthus ; Sabella; Mya in great numbers; and a very large Pholas, buried at least a foot and a half in hard soil or clay, and having siphons, the open ends of which, at the surface of the ground, measure nearly two inches across. If you would like to have specimens of these, let me know and I will send you some when the tides ebb low enough to reach them.

The following paper was also read :—

THE HISTORICAL FAUNA OF LANCASHIRE

AND CHESHIRE.

BY CUTHBERT COLLINGWOOD, M.B., F.L.S., &c., Foreign Member of the Royal Physico-Economical Society of Königsberg.

In the last volume of the Proceedings of this Society I published a paper on the Ancient Fauna of Lancashire and Cheshire, in which I endeavoured to obtain a glimpse at the past inhabitants which, in geologic ages successively peopled the region we now call the counties palatine of Lancashire and Cheshire,—as far as such a glimpse could be derived from the mutilated remains spared to us from the carboniferous and triassic rocks. In that paper I purposely abstained from entering upon any records of the historic period, reserving these for a future opportunity, which has now arrived. Should a new and elaborated edition of the Fauna of Liverpool ever be prepared, I venture to think that that paper would prove an interesting and appropriate introductory chapter; and the paper I am about to present is a supplement to it-a second introductory chapter to our local Fauna. In it I propose to bring forward, collected from every available source, the records of the appearance in our two counties of animals either rare at all times or which have at intervals appeared there, and thus left traces of their existence in the note-book of zoological observers. For in studying the Fauna of any district, attention should be directed not only to the every-day appearance of characteristic or dominant species, but also to the casual appearance of visitors, which from any cause have been drawn to the spot; since, for every such unwonted visitation there has doubtless heen some natural reason; and while such visits invest a district with

unusual zoological interest, it must also be borne in mind that what has happened once, may happen again; and it is at all events more probable that an animal which has once been observed, may visit us again, than that we should meet with one which has never been seen amongst us.

In the records of local Natural History observation, certain districts stand out conspicuously, from the accident of some ardent lover of nature having lived upon the spot, whose chronicles have rendered the place classical in zoological annals. Such districts are Hants and Sussex, celebrated by the diligence of such men as Gilbert White, and of Markwick; such a region also is the Dorset and Devon coast, which the indefatigable Col. Montague scoured so thoroughly—and such may be called the Cornish coast, which has boasted a Borlase, and still boasts a Couch, and a Spence Bate. Such districts yield ample proof that it requires careful and continued observation to develope the riches of a given locality; and were the same test applied to other localities they doubtless would not be behindhand in affording an interesting and extended historical Fauna. Antiquarians and naturalists too, have existed in most counties, who have collected information of greater or less value, relative to many parts of the country, and few of the older topographical works were regarded by their compilers as complete, without some account of the natural productions of the district described. But, still the value and extent of these sections of such works depend upon the character of the investigations which had been carried on by previous observers, and are most complete where such observers have been most numerous, accurate, and painstaking. Such works as Camden's Britannia also, contain scattered notices of the botany and zoology of the country, and occasionally give curious information as to the productions which have from time to time been met with. The chief works relating specially to the counties palatine,

which have been found to yield information upon these topics, are Leigh's "Natural History of Lancashire," and Ormerod's "History of Cheshire." Of these the former is an old work, published in 1705, and contains numerous notices of great interest upon the Fauna of the county, but usually couched in quaint language, and describing the animals under peculiar names, which the modern zoologist has to translate into recent systematic phraseology, a task in which, however, he is aided by good plates. Ormerod's "History of Cheshire," published in 1819, is a much more voluminous work, but contains but few references to this department of local history, and the information derivable from it on this head is remarkably meagre. The former, however, professes to be a Natural History of the County, while the latter is a purely topographical work, of which almost the sum total of its zoological information is to be gleaned from the notices of the ancient forests of the county. The same may also be said of Mortimer's "History of Wirral." We have some brief notices in Pennant's Tour which possess a certain interest, and Leland's Itinerary touches upon some districts in our counties, a work, which having been written in the early part of the 16th century, cannot be otherwise than useful for our purpose.

The ancient condition of the two counties can scarcely be realized at the present day, when they are by no means remarkable for the growth of fine timber. Forests then abounded both in Lancashire and Cheshire, but more particularly in the latter county. The entire Hundred of Wirral was formed into a forest by Randle (Ranulphus) Meschines, third Earl of Chester, but was disafforested in the reign of Edward III, and twenty marks per annum allowed to the Stanleys in lieu of the profits of their office. Hence we see the truth of the old distich

"From Blacon point to Hilbree

The squirrel might leap from tree to tree."