OF SOUTHERN INDIA. 5d 
specimen, or, at least one with obliterate and partly destroyed shell-surface, 
appears to have been figured by D’Orbigny as Ovula incerta (loc. cit.). It is 
remarkable with what firmness this great French naturalist insisted upon the idea, 
that there are no cretaceous Cyprea. It seems as if he had not givenin the 
above figure the ventral view, because it appeared to him to resemble too much a 
true Cyprea, which doubt he attempted to express in the name mecerta. The 
covering of the ventral side with rock probably made its exposure impossible, and 
so left him in doubt. 
Localities —Kullygoody and near Andoor in Trichinopoly district; several speci- 
mens were examined. 
Formation.—Trichinopoly group. 
4. Cyprma (Luponta) Cunuirret, Forbes. Pl. IV, Fig. 4. 
1846. Cyprea Cunliffei, Forbes, Trans. Geol. Soc., Lond., VII, p. 134, Pl. XII, Fig. 22. 
1850. Ovula antiquata, D’Orbigny, Prod. II, p. 225, in parte. 
Idem Gabb, Pictet, etc. 
Cyp. testa elongate ovata, cylindracea, levigata, utrinque emarginata; anfrac- 
tibus occultis, spira in superficie impressione levi notata; apertura angustissina, 
antice dilatata, dentata; labro prope recto, postice attenuato, antice insinuato atque 
acuto; labio plicose-dentato. 
This species differs from the former, the Cyprea Newboldi, by its more slender 
and cylindrical form, and comparatively much narrower aperture. The surface is 
in our specimen smooth, exhibiting occasionally strie of growth. The spiral 
(transversal) striation referred to by Professor Forbes is not to be observed in any 
of our specimens. If this striation is actually present on the enameled surface of 
the shell, the species will be probably better referred to Trivia, Gray, belonging to 
the sub-genus Pustularia. With this the somewhat more produced anterior and 
posterior extremities and the dense, fold-like, dentition of the inner lip are rather in 
conformity, which characters sufficiently justify the separation of this form from 
Cyprea Newboldi. The anterior canal is also more distinctly emarginated and 
the posterior shorter, than in the latter species. Forbes’ figure represents a 
comparatively somewhat shorter specimen on account of its being either a cast, or, 
at least, partially devoid of the enamel coating; otherwise the dentition must have 
been visible. 
Locality —Near Veraghoor in Trichinopoly district; three specimens were 
examined. 
Formation.—Arrialoor group. 
