' 206 
caudal appendages. ‘The remainder of the chambers are considerably 
larger and are in certain sections roughly pentangular in outline, Plate I, 
fig. 2, shows the central portion of the large specimen, much enlarged. 
In the photomicrograph it is the black band running through the center. 
Just what the meaning of this is, the writer is unable to determine at 
the present time, as he has not seen it in a sufficient number of specimens 
to ascertain whether it is accidental or is some characteristic feature. 
Plate I, fig. 2, shows one of the commoner, smaller forms measuring 
approximately 8 by 4 millimeters. This is unusually circular, but 
many specimens are almost identical with those figured in Plate 1, fig. 4, 
of Newton and Holland’s paper, and coming from lrometé Island. 
We have as yet seen none from the Philippines to correspond to 
O. angularis, figured on Plate I of their paper. 
CONCLUSIONS, 
As von Richthofen merely mentioned his having discovered Num- 
mulites in the Binangonan limestone and never discribed, nor, to our 
knowledge, figured, any of the species, and as we have not yet found a 
Nummulite from that horizon, we can not find much evidence for calling 
this formation Kocene. 
Furthermore, Orbitoides (O. verbeeki Newt. and Holl.), probably the 
same as our smaller forms (PI. 1, fig. 1), have been found in limestone, 
in the Riu Kiu Group, which the British paleontologists, Newton and 
Holland, have placed in the Miocene, and they have been encountered 
still farther north, in Japan, with Lithothamnium. Also Martin® has 
declared the orbitoidal marl of Cebu equivalent to the “Java Gruppe” 
in which Vicarya callosa, the type fossil of the Miocene, was found. 
In this connection it is both interesting and due to Becker," who, though 
he was greatly handicapped in his work at the time of his stay in the 
Islands by the unsettled state of the country, nevertheless saw enough to 
make suggestions invaluable to all succeeding workers, to quote him. 
I must confess that the paleontological evidence as to the existence of the 
Kocene in the Philippines seems to me far from satisfactory. * * * I can see 
no reason as yet why the Binangonan limestone may not be Oligocene or even 
Miocene. 
Very recently the writer has examined some sections from the Benguet 
and Lepanto limestones which Mr. Eveland, his colleague, submitted to 
him, and which lead him to think it quite likely that these beds are the 
northward extensions of the Binangonan formation. This is not surpris- 
ing, for we should certainly expect some intermediate occurrences between 
the Riu Kiu Group and southern Luzon. In certain beds of limestone 
5 Loe. cit. 
*G. F. Becker: “Geology of the Philippine Islands,” 2/st Ann. Report, U..8:; 
G. S. (1902), 552. 
