LAMELLIBRANCHIATA OF THE LOWER MARLS. 147 



Academy of Natural Sciences at Philadelphia, and he places the species as 

 a synonym under Veniella Conradi, only from the evidence fruniished by 

 Dr. Morton's figure, still expressing a possibility, however, that it may be 



distinct. 



Formation and locality.— li) the Lower Green Marls at Blue-Ball, New 

 Jersey, and at the marl pits of I. Stratton, near MuUica Hill, New Jersey. 

 Dr. Morton's specimen was from the Uue marls at Saint George's, Delaware. 



Veniella inflata. 



Plate XIX, figs. 4 and 5. 



Goniosoma inflata Conrad. Am. Jour. Couch., Vol. V, p. 44, PI. I, Fig. 10. 

 Comp. Y. elevata Conrad. Am. Jour. Conch., VoL VI, p. 74, PI. Ill, Fig. 7. 



Shell small, subquadrangular in outline, with inflated valves, and large, 

 prominent, incurved beaks, which project considerably above the hinge- 

 line, are rather erect and nearly centrally situated. Umbonal ridge sharply 

 angular, and the postero-cardinal slope very abrupt and narrow. Anterior 

 end of the shell sharply rounded, and the posterior squarely truncate, while 

 the basal margin is broadly curved. The specimen, which is an internal 

 cast, shows the muscular imprints rounded and strongly marked, and the 

 pallial line distinct and simple. The hinge features show a strong trian- 

 gular tooth beneath the beak in the left valve, and two smaller ones in the 

 right, with an elongate lateral ridge in front on the right valve representing 

 a ridge on the left valve. Surface of the shell unknown. 



Mr. Conrad makes this shell the type of a new genus, Goniosoma, but 

 there certainly is no feature about it in which it differs from the typical 

 forms of Veniella as shown in F. Conradi, and as regards the specific 

 features of the individual I can see no reason why it may not be identical 

 with r. elevata Conrad. But as I have not seen any but the one type 

 specimen of this, a cast, and no cast of V. elevata, unless this be one, I have 

 hesitated to cite it as positively the same, although I believe it is. Dr. 

 Stoliczka remarks that the form of this species is like Veniella, but considers, 

 undoubtedly on Mr. Conrad's authority as given in his generic descrip- 

 tion, the hinge entirely distinct, which, I think, is an error; though for this 



