FREE INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE 



PLATE I. 



Figure i. Pyrida nans ei no iidi ^d.gne.r. [Bronn, 1848, pp. 1070-71; 1849, 

 p. 457.] This is now referred to the genus Fiilgur and is probably 

 identical with F. maximum Conrad, Fos. Tert. Form , No. 2, cover, pi. 48, 

 fig. I, 1840. The name seems to imply that Professor Wagner's speci- 

 men came from the Miocene beds on the Nansemond River, near the 

 town of Suffolk, Nansemond County, Virginia. 



Figure 2, A, B. This is the only species figured to which I have not been 

 able to discover a reference in Bronn. Either it is omitted or is inserted 

 under some generic name which has not occurred to me. I have been 

 disposed to regard it as representing the upper valve of Discinisca liigii- 

 bris Conrad, which is not uncommon in the formation from which several 

 of the species here figured are known to be derived. 



Figure 3. Area virginim Wagner. [Bronn, 1848, p. 99; 1849, p. 283.] This 

 is an excellent species of which the figured types are still in the Wagner 

 collection. 



Figure 4. Ai'ca carolinensis Wagner. [Bronn, 1848, p. 93; 1849, p. 283.] 

 This also is a well-characterized species to which no name has been 

 applied during the half-century which has elapsed since it was figured 

 from the types still existing in the Wagner collection. A valve in the 

 collection of the U. S. National Museum was obtained from the Upper 

 Miocene of Duplin County, North Carolina. 



PLATE 2. 



Figure i. Fusus fi'agilis Wagner. [Bronn, 1848, p. 513; 1849, P- 4S3-] 

 This resembles Fusiis equalis Emmons (Geol. Rep. N. Car., p. 250, fig. 1 1 1, 

 1858) so much that it is probably identical with it. It will be observed 

 that the species was undescribed when figured by Professor Wagner. 

 Specimens in the National Museum were obtained from the Upper Mio- 

 cene of the Natural Well, Duplin County, North Carolina. A broken 

 fragment, without label, in the Wagner collection may perhaps be the 

 remains of the type, though this is doubtful. This fragment is hardly 

 identifiable, but may represent Fusus exilis Conr. rather than F. equalis. 



Figure 2. Fusus uuibilicatus Wagner. [Bronn, 1848, p. 517, cites this in the 

 synonymy of F. qiiadricostatus Say (Journ. Acad. Nat. Sciences, iv., p. 



