106 CRETACEOUS GASTROPODA 
them to be corrrectly determined, must be classed in this group. There is a little 
discrepancy, I believe, between Binkhorst’s figures, which requires explanation. 
The two species are known from impressions and casts only, but in the Fig. 9b, 
Pl. Y? of Z. plicata the spiral strie show such a direction as could be explained 
only by a pressure of the specimen, which, however, is not apparent in the figure. 
The upper volutions of the two Turbinelle and of Imbricaria Limburgensis, 
Binkhst. (Joc. cit. Pl. Il, Fig. 8,) are exceedingly like, while the outline of the outer- 
lip in the last species does not show that form at all, although it appears to be 
otherwise perfect. I notice these points merely as doubts arising from the inspection 
of the figures, but I had never an opportunity of seeing any of these valuable 
specimens, and apparent identity may be in reality great distinction. There is 
unquestionably much to be anticipated from well preserved specimens. 
Gabb described two cast-specimens as Twb. subconica and parva (Proceed. Acad. 
Nat. sc. Phil. for 1860, publ. 1861, p. 94, Pl. 2, Figs. 6 and 3) from New Jersey ; but 
the specimens being far from perfect even as casts, it is difficult to form an opinion 
about them. 
b. Sub-family—FASCIOLARIIN 2. 
The principal character of this sub-family lies in the disposition of the colu- 
mellar plaits, these being present only on the fore-part of the inner lip along the 
canal, and the anterior plait being usually the strongest. ‘There are only very few, 
and these only partial, exceptions to be met with in one or two species of Leucozonia, 
where the middle plaits are stronger and those along the canal somewhat thinner. 
The shells exhibit great variety in shape, from shortly-ovate to elongated-fusiform, 
but the canal is always considerably produced. ‘There seems to be at the present no 
ereat necessity for establishing more genera than stated by Gray (Guide, 1857, p. 28), 
namely Fusciolaria, Latirus and Leucozonia. I do not, however, consider the 
question as to their classification in the Fascrozarmyx at all settled. It appears 
doubtful whether it would not be better to separate Leuwcozonia and a few species 
of Latirus and Fasciolaria, marked by a great thickness of the shell, to a separate 
sub-family, and those with a thin shell, most nearly resembling Fwsus, into another 
sub-family. Iam only little acquainted with the numerous living species, but nearly 
all the fossil forms belong to the group with a thin shell. In this latter group very 
similar generic or sub-generic separations could be made as among the Fusinz, 
Adams and accordingly also Chenu, classed Tudicla, Bolt., Busycon, Bolt. and 
Fastigiella, Reeve, in this sub-family. It appears that Tudicla belongs rather to 
the Purrverps next to Rapa; Busycon was subsequently transferred by Adams 
(Genera, II, p. 655) to the rvsrv# and Fustigiella to the CERITHID®. This classifica- 
tion is no doubt more correct. There are several tertiary species, known as Cerithiwm, 
which must then be classed under Fustigiella, although, in having a slight insinuosity 
on the lower portion of the outer lip, they recall very much Phos, Montft.; and it 
appears not quite certain, whether these two ought not to form a separate sub-family 
in the Buccrnipm. Scarcely any Jurassic species of rascrozarin# are known. 
Piette mentions (Bull. Soc. Géol. France, 1856, XITT, p. 598, Pl. XV, Figs. 15 and 16) 
