﻿592 BULLETIN 103, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



les deux gisements, et que leur age est au-dessus des couches de Bowden a la Jamaique> 

 qui ont fait I'objet d'une etude de la part de Guppy. Ces derni^res renferment uno 

 tres belle faune doat j'ai pas mal de spocimens dans ma collection: sans alien jusqu'i 

 parta'^er completement I'opinion de M. Dall qui les rapporte a r01i;ocene. je croia 

 qu'ellcs representent I'equivalent de notre Aquitanien, c'est-a-dire le Miocene 

 inferieur, tandis, que les fossiles do la Martinique et de Gatun (Panama) seraient un 

 peu plus rdcents, probablement du Miocene moyen. Enfin. d'apres les matc'riaux 

 que j'ai pu ctudier a I'EcoIe des Mines, les fossiles de Saint-Domin;ue (Haiti), etudieg 

 par Gabb at par Sowerby, representeraient un niveau deja plus clevd, celui du Miocene 

 euperieur. 



M. Cossmann considers this material from Martinique as younger 

 than the Bowden fauna. 



Precise information on the paleontology of the Tertiary formations 

 of Guadeloupe is exceedingly meager, in fact it is almost nothing. 

 Dr. J. W. Spencer submitted to me a specimen of Stylopliora^ col- 

 lected by him in a limestone near Les Abimes. Accurate identi- 

 fication of a species of StylopJiora may be a proper basis for precise 

 correlation, but the genus ranges from upper Eocene to middle 

 Miocene (about Helvetian) in the West Indian Tertiarios. In 

 1849 Milne Edwards and Haime described a coral from the "Terrain 

 tertiare" of Guadeloupe, under the name Tliecosmilia ponderosa, and 

 subsequently transferred it to the genus Montlivaltia? I have photo- 

 graphs of the type of this species, kindly sent me by my friend Dr 

 Charles Gravier of the Museum d'Histoirc Naturellc, Paris. It be- 

 longs to the genus Antillia and is closely related to A. hilohata Duncan. 

 Montlivaltia guesdesi, described by Duchassaing and Michelotti^ from 

 Guadeloupe and said to be associated with Aniillia ponderosa, is also 

 a species of Antillia. A. guesdesi is so similar to A. hilohata that 

 Duchassaing and Michelotti placed the latter in its synonomy. As I 

 have seen no specimens of A. guesdesi, I must base any opinions con- 

 cerning it upon its authors' figures and descriptions. It seems to me 

 different from A. hilohata, but as the distinction between the two 

 consists in the relative number of teeth within 1 centimeter on the 

 septal margins, and as the details of the figures of A. guesdesi may be 

 inaccurate, it would be improper to insist that they are different. 

 However that may be, there are in Guadeloupe two supposed, very 

 nearly related species of Antillia, and they are actually or almost 

 indistinguishable from species that occur in Santo Domingo at a 

 horizon near or above that of the Bowden marl. The evidence for 

 Guadeloupe, therefore, indicates the presence there of deposits of 

 uppermost Burdigalian or Helvetian age. There may be Tertiary 

 deposits both older and younger than the bed in which the specimens of 

 Antillia were collected. Doctor Spencer's structure section across the 

 island strongly suggests that such deposits are there. 



1 Spencer, J. W., On the geological and physical development of Ouadaloupe, Geol. Soc. London Joum., 

 Vol.ST, pp.50r>-519, 1901. 

 » Hist. nat. Corall., vol. 2, p. 312. 18.J7. 

 » Mfem. corall. Ant., p. 69 (of reprint), pis. 5, fig. 13, 1860. 



