100 PALEONTOLOGY OF NEW JERSEY. 



exactly the same features as do these New Jersey specimens, and it is pos- 

 sible that they belong here. 



TURBINOPSIS HiLGARDI? 



Plate XII, Figs. 7-9. 



Turhinopsis Hilgardi Conrad: Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 2d ser., vol. 4, p. 289, 

 PI. XLVi, Fig. 29 ; Gabb, Synopsis, p. 86 ; Meek, Check List Cret. and Jur. 

 Foss., p. 19; Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1876, p. 300. 



Turhinopsis depressus Gabb: Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1876, p. 300. 



Cancellaria Hilgardi (Conrad) Gabb : Synopsis, p. 42, and Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. , 

 Phila., 1876, p. 300. 



The casts which I have identified with this species are extremely im- 

 perfect; two of them retain the external markings and the external form; 

 another is a cast of the interior, retaining the external markings somewhat 

 on a part of the outer volution, and the imprint of them on the inside of the 

 cast of the volutions; form turbinate; the spire somewhat elevated, with 

 convex volutions, separated by very distinct sutures; the volutions largest 

 a little below the upper side and rapidly contracted below, giving them an 

 obconical or turbinate form; umbilical opening in the internal cast moder- 

 ately large, the margin sharply angular; aperture elliptical, acute below 

 and more rounded above ; volutions four or five ; columella concave, ridge 

 or fold not shown ; surface marked by spiral ridges sixteen or more in num- 

 ber; interspaces as wide as or wider than the ridges; these are crossed by 

 vertical folds which are more distant than the ridges, and are rounded; 

 strongest on the upper part of the volution and obsolete below. 



The specimens referred to this species are badly crushed, so the iden- 

 tification may be considered somewhat doubtful. The spire seems to have 

 been proportionally higher than that of Conrad's figures, and the volutions 

 less compressed below; the umbilicus is smaller, and, besides, there is the 

 absence of vertical folds on the original which are distinct on these. The 

 folds, however, are small and rather closely arranged. I hesitate much 

 in identifying them with the figure given of the type on account of these 

 wide differences, but were the specimens less imperfect they might show 

 more intimate resemblances. There may be some doubt as to the identity 

 of Gabb's T. depressa Avith this species, as the measurements given by him 



