﻿CAPULUS. 207 



like Mr. Vicary's specimen, but that species is distinctly different, being more 

 deeply furrowed, twisted, and with a much less recurved umbo. Barrois' 1 figure 

 of the same species also closely resembles it, but may be distinguished by the 

 same particulars ; and on the whole I think that, though closely allied, the English 

 and German species are not identical. 



3. Capulus rostratus, Trenkner? PI. XX, figs. 6 — 8. 



1852. Pileopsis compeessa, Quenstedt (not Gold/.). Handb. Petref., p. MO, 



pi. XXXV, fig. 11. 



? 1853. Capulus gracilis, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 236, pi. xxvi, 



figs. 17, 17 a. 

 ? 1867. — eosteatus, Trenkner. Palaont. Novitat., pt. 1, p. 12, pi. i, 



fig. 22. 

 ? 1884. — — Clarke. Neues Jahrb. £. Min., Beil.-Band iii, p. 362, 



pi. v, figs. 10, 11. 



Description. — Shell rather large, very much depressed, lenticular, very short, 

 trigonal. Spire usually much recurved, and consisting of more than a 

 volution, rather depressed below the highest plane of the shell, slightly tending 

 upwards, involute. Apex minute, rather distant from the plane of the mouth. 

 Body- whorl short, rapidly and regularly increasing ; very much flattened, being 

 gently convex above, deeply convex on the narrow back, and concave below ; 

 horizontally convex along the back, concave on the inner side and nearly straight 

 below. Mouth not expanded, not sinuous except perhaps at the back. Surface 

 marked with numerous, irregular, flattish, arched growth-lines, tending upwards 

 near the back, and crossed by crowded, indistinct and discontinuous, microscopic, 

 spiral stria3. 



Size. — Width 34 mm., depth 24 mm., height about 10 mm. 



Locality. — A fine and large specimen from Wolborough is in Mr. Vicary's 

 Collection. There are four smaller specimens from Lummaton in my Collection, 

 and one probably from the same locality in the Torquay Museum. 



Remarks. — I should at once have placed these shells with the following 

 species, were it not for their greater flatness, for the greater curvature of 

 the back, and for the pronounced spiral concavity of the under side. This last 

 character can only be seen in the two small specimens in my Collection, as Mr. 

 Vicary's large specimen is embedded in the matrix at that part. In that specimen, 

 moreover, the spire is much more recurved, owing probably to its being a much 

 older shell. The above-mentioned features seem to point to the probability of 

 1 1889, Barrois, ' Faun. Calc. d'Ebray,' p. 197, pi. xiii, figs. 6«— e. 



