Page:The Eurypterida of New York Volume 1.pdf/402

 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  Thor. & Lindstr." Other reasons are cited by this eminent authority on the scorpions in favor of the closer relationship 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 matter 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 assertions. 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