HILL: GEOLOGY OF THE ISTHMUS OF PANAMA. 210 
I have run over the specimens from Costa Rica. A good many of 
them contain no fossils, Nos. 88 and 89 (Bonilla) so far as they are 
fossiliferous have the Monkey Hill (Upper Oligocene) fauna, and while 
the matrix is coarser the greensand material marked ав occurring 
above them is the same as the Monkey Hill matrix essentially, but 
contain only unidentifiable fragments of fossils. No. 91, the Guallava 
sandstone, is interesting. It is Lower Oligocene, and exactly comparable 
or rather equivalent to our Vicksburgian, containing only Vicksburg 
species, including the genuine Orbitoides mantelli, Phos, Dentalium, 
Plicatula anomia, etc., all Vicksburg species. 
Rzromr py Pror. В. M. Baca UPON THE FORAMINIFERAL Deposits 
NEAR BUJIO, AND OF THE EMPIRE LIMESTONE. 
The main mass of the rocks of the specimens forwarded is composed 
of Orbitoides forbesii Carpenter, which is undoubtedly an Eocene form. 
Other species identified are: Cristellaria lenticula Reuss; Dulimina 
ovata d'Orbigny; Gaudryina reussi Stache; Sagrina striata Schnager ; 
Truncatulina sp. indet. 
All of the above are Tertiary forms. I have no hesitation in pro- 
nouncing the rocks to be of Eocene age. 
Regarding the sections of the Empire limestone, it is not easy to 
determine anything but generic types in sections. These slides you 
send contain transverse sections of Nummulites, one Orbitoides, Cristel- 
laria or Rotative type, and Nodosaria. It is probably an Eocene rock, 
as the Nummulites are the predominating type. 
Rerort ON THE Fossil CORALS COLLECTED. 
By T. Wayland Vaughan. 
Those from the old reef, 14 miles west of Port Limon, Costa Rica, 
are: Meandrina filograna (Esper.) ; Diehoccenia stokesi M. Edwards and 
Haime; Orbicella acropora (Linn.); Siderastrea sp.; cf. S. galaxea 
( Pallas). 
All of these species are recent as well as fossil. 
Notes regarding the distribution elsewhere of these fossil species from 
the raised reef near Port Limon, can be found in a memoir by Dr. J. W. 
Gregory. 
1 Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. London, Vol. LI. pp. 257-285, August, 1895. [See 
also Verrill’s Reports, cited on p. 172. — R. T. H.] 
