100 Transactions. 
occurrence of T. tiaratus is mentioned in seven different localities: 
Bryant’s Farm (Gisborne), Scinde Island, Petone, Wanganui, Motunau 
beds, Саре Wanbrow, and Target Gully. АП these except the first and 
last are Pliocene or Pleistocene. In the first case an impression only was 
; in the last case it appears to the 
author that T. tiaratus is a very doubtful record, probably copied, with- 
out revision, from incorrect early lists. Besides these occurrences, there 
are two more in the Trans. N.Z. Inst. The first (Thomson, 1920, p. 393) 
is in the Pliocene Greta beds, and the second is in a final list given by 
Speight (1917, p. 355) at the close of his paper on the Trelissick beds, but 
it is not mentioned in any of the component lists elsewhere in the paper, 
and has probably crept in as an error. From this evidence it is seen 
that there is as yet no published reliable record of T. tiaratus Q. & G. in 
any New Zealand beds older than the Pliocene, and that this species, 
therefore, is not a Miocene form. Suter’s record from Target Gully was 
probably based on a fragment of one of the new Calliostoma species 
described in this paper. 
This leaves us with Calliostoma n. sp. and Basilissa n. sp. In the 
Otago School of Mines collection are some small fragments labelled in 
Suter’s handwriting, “ Calliostoma, very likely n. sp., Target Gully,” and 
these are probably the original specimens, for the first mention of a 
Calliostoma from this locality occurs in Bulletin No. 20, and Mr. J. Mar- 
wick wrote saying, “ As regards the Calliostoma n. sp. of Park’s list, I 
do not know what shell is referred to, but it is probably one of your species 
so labelled by Suter previous to his introduction of Basilissa. I have not 
come across it in any of Park’s collections." What there is left of these 
shells agrees perfectly with fragments in the author’s collection from Target 
kh 
© 
E 
B 
Б. 
£5 
= 
= 
eg 
E. 
ün 
E 
Со 
B 
eo 
к. 
я. 
[<] 
8, 
e. 
© 
c 
cet 
Tm 
= 
Р. 
Gully, and there is no doubt that Suter was correct in referring this shell | 
to Calliostoma. This species, though identical with the Dowling Bay 
shell and a form rather rare at Ardgowan, is different from the other 
species mentioned from Target Gully, which is also rather common at 
Argdowan. Inquiry made of Mr. Marwick elicited several interesting 
points about this second form. He managed to place the shell as 
identical with specimens in the Geological Survey collection from Target 
Gully and also Ardgowan, and labelled by Suter “ Basilissa n. вр.” In 
this collection was also another shell, which is Suter’s second species of 
Basilissa from Ardgowan, and which differs from all the author's speci- 
mens. Regarding Basilissa, Mr. Marwick says, “ It is hard to understan 
why Suter classed these shells as Basilissa. In the “ Challenger” Report, 
Zoology, xv, p. 96, Watson, the author of this genus, gives the following 
description :— 
. “ Basilissa : Shell conical, carinated, umbilicated, nacreous ; last whorl 
sinuated above; pillar. straight, and in its direction but little oblique, 
thin, bollowed out above, in front hardly toothed, but at the base strongly 
“ There is no trace of this sinus shown by the wth-lines, nor is 
there an umbilicus, so I think the classification as Calliostoma is muc 
more suitable." 
There is one more record of Basilissa that the author has come across 
and that is а shell in the Otago University School of Mines collection, 
. labelled again in Suter's handwriting, “ Basilissa n. sp., Target Gully. 
