‘ a “* . = . 
102 Description of some New Species of Fossil Shells. 
M. eburnea. PI. 1, fig. 21. 
M. testa sub-turrita, levi, sub-crassa, polité ; spira sub-elevata, 
acuta; suturis impressis ; anfractibus octonis, sub-planulatis ; basi 
striata ; columella triplicata ; apertura sub-ovata. 
Shell sub-turrited, somewhat thick, smooth, polished; spire 
acute, elevated ; sutures impressed ; whorls , nearly flat ; base 
striated ; columella with three folds; mouth sub-ovate. 
Length ‘6. Breadth ‘25 of an inch. : 
Remarks.—In this species the mouth is nearly one third as. 
long as the shell. Itmuch resembles the M. minima, Lea, but is 
easily distinguished from that species by its superior size, the 
three folds on the columella, and the number of striz at the base, © 
for this species has about twenty very fine ones, while the nvini- 
ma has only four or five large ones.. Of the three folds on the 
columella the lowest one is very small. 
M. elegans. Pl. 1, fig. 22. 
M. testa sub-turrita, elongata, sub-crassa, transverse striata, lon- 
gitudinaliter costata; spira acuta; anfractibus septenis, convex 
is; suturis impressis; columella octoplicata, plicis minimis; aper- 
tura sub-ovata, angusta. ; 
Shell sub-turrited, elongated, somewhat thick, transversely 
striate, longitudinally costate ; spire acute ; whorls seven, convex; 
sutures impressed ; columella with eight very small folds ; mouth 
sub-ovate, narrow. 
Length °5. Breadth -2 of an inch. 4 
Remarks.—This elegant Mitra has more folds on the columella 
than any other species [ have met with. The M. fenestrataand 
M. crenulata, with a few others mentioned in Lamarck, having 
been separated under the name of Coneliz, to which genus, how- 
ever, this shell cannot be referred, on account of the length of 
the spire. The longitudinal coste become almost obsolete on the 
last whorl. ‘The mouth is nearly half as long as-the shell, being 
-2in length. The last whorl is striated to the base. This shell - 
may be regarded as the link between the genera Mitra and Tere: 
bra, as it much resembles the T’. gracilis, Lea, and 'T. multiplical 
above described ; however, its channel is not either marked or tf 
curved enough for a T'erebra. 
