Xl8 TRANSACTIONS OF THE WAGNER FREE 



Mechanically, Fidgiir by its obliquely grooved pillar in many species is analo- 

 gous to those forms Y\\i& FasciolariayN\i\.c\\ have such plaits on the pillar, while 

 Tudicla, with its raised pillar-lip and transverse ridge of callus following the 

 rule for horizontally coiled gastropods, is analogous rather to Titrbinella proper. 

 I may add that the supposed difference, upon which Conrad laid such 

 stress, between the larval shells of Sycotypiis and Fiilgiir is non-existent 

 except as a pathological monstrosity. 



Subfamily FUSING. 

 Genus Melongena Schumacher. 



As far as one may judge from the literature and the specimens in the National 

 collection, the genus Melongena appears suddenly in the American Tertiary 

 in the guise of a large and well-developed species, M. crassicoj'tmta Conrad, 

 from the Vicksburg limestone or later Eocene. Subsequently (Proc. Acad. 

 Nat. Sci. Phil. vi. p. 321, 1853) Conrad referred this to a genus of Purpurida 

 consisting solely of Fiisus niinax Brander, Pseudoliva {Monocei^os) armigera 

 Conrad, and Melongeiia crassicornuta. This " genus " he called Conmlina 

 (though it was on one occasion printed Cormdirid), and its type was the 

 Murex minax of Brander, the Fusus minax of Deshayes and others, an 

 Eocene fossil of France (Paris Basin) and England. The third species, 

 crassicornuta, was doubtfully added to the list, as the characteristic part of the 

 lip was broken away in the type and unique specimen figured by Conrad. 



Cor7mlina was placed next to Monoceros {= Acanthind) by Conrad and 

 separated from it by having several small teeth on the outer lip in front of the 

 usual single tooth, and by having a rounded instead of a flattened pillar. As 

 the species definitely referred to it were, first, F. minax, which is treated — 

 though not specified — as the type ; and, secondly, Monoceros armigera Conrad, 

 which is precisely a tuberculated Pseudoliva : the permanence of the name 

 depends on these two, especially the first, since they do not, in my opinion, 

 belong together, neither does Melongena crassicormita Conrad belong with 

 either of the others. 



It has been incorrectly stated by Tryon that Cormdina had not been 

 characterized, as he seems to have wholly overlooked the publication in 1853 

 in the proceedings of his own society. 



I see no reason whatever to doubt that M. crassicormda is a true Melon- 

 gena. It has stouter and relatively fewer spines than subsequent species, but 

 no other difference. 



The next species appears in the Lower Miocene, and is perhaps a descend- 

 ant of M. crassicormda. 



Melongena sculpturata n. s. 

 Plate 8, figure 3. 



Miocene of Ballast Point silex-beds, near Tampa, Florida ; of the limerock 

 immediately overlying the silex-beds, especially at the estate of Mr. Lapenotiere, 



