TRANSACTIONS OF WAGNER 

 586 



TERTIARY FAUNA OF FLORIDA 



from Princeton College obtained from the marls of Freehold, N. J. (pp. cit., 

 p. 108, pi. xi., figs. 12, 13), which he supposes to be identical with the Ten- 

 nessee species., and also of a smaller specimen which should, from the figure, 

 belong to another and distinct species. The Tennessee shell must, of course, 

 keep the name, being the original type. This has been redescribed and 

 figured (Bull. Am. Pal., iv., p. 55, pi. iv., fig. 9, 1896) by Harris, to whom 

 Professor Saffbrd lent the type specimen, which really came from the Midway 

 Eocene and not from the Cretaceous Ripley beds as now restricted. Professor 

 Harris apparently overlooked the name given by Whitfield and renamed the 

 species L. Saffordana. In this connection it may be pointed out that the two 

 casts figured by Professor Whitfield as illustrative of Conrad's L. albaria (op. 

 cit., p. 228, pi. xi., figs. 15 and 16) cannot, in my opinion, be regarded cither 

 as belonging to one and the same species themselves, nor can either of them 

 be referred to Conrad's original species. As they cannot be specifically iden- 

 tified without better material it is best not to name them. In the synonymy 

 of Y. protexla Conr. (= albaria) Professor Whitfield remarks " not Yoldia pra- 

 texta Gabb," but this should read " not Leda protexta Gabb," since I believe 

 Mr. Gabb did not describe a Yoldia with that specific name, though he gave 

 the latter to three different species of Lcda. 



Lastly, Professor Harris, in his synonymy, queries whether the Lcda bclla 

 var. Conr., from Alabama, may not be identical with L. Gabbaiia. It is possible 

 that this may be the shell meant by Conrad in his Eocene Checklist when he 

 catalogued a Nuculana protexta from Alabama, as above mentioned. But, 

 since it is absolutely impossible to determine the question either way, it will 

 not be profitable to discuss it. The lesson taught by this whole chapter of 

 blunders is sufficiently obvious. 



Leda acala n. s. 

 PLATE 32, FIGURE 3. 



Wood's Bluff, Alabama, C. W. Johnson ; Butler, Alabama, Aldrich. 



Shell thin, nearly smooth, elongate, acutely rostrate, inequilateral, 

 moderately convex; beaks small, prominent, but not high; anterior slope 

 shorter, slightly descending ; anterior end rounded ; posterior slope nearly 

 straight, posterior end narrow, bluntly pointed, base arcuate; lunule very 

 narrow, almost linear, slightly raised, the incremental lines near it strong; 

 escutcheon narrow, excavated, bordered by a sharp elevated line, outside of 



