PLEUROTOMARIA. 
291 
has since caused me to refer them to a different species. I have met with no other 
specimens belonging to either of these two forms ; and consequently it must remain 
doubtful to which of them the shell which Phillips quotes from Newton belongs. 
The shell which Phillips gives in his fig. 177*, and speaks of as " perhaps a 
cast of this species," belongs apparently to PL victrix. As he does not quote 
Newton as a " doubtful " locality, it seems unlikely that this is the only shell 
referred to from that place. 
10. Pleurotomaria cancellata, Phillips. PI. XXVIII, fig. 4. 
1841. Pleueotomaria cakcellata, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 96, pi. xxxvii, figs. 
176 a—c, f. 
1849. — — d'Orbiffny. Prodrome, vol. i, p. 69. 
1854. — — Morris. Catal. Brit. Foss., p. 272. 
1888. — — Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal, p. 164. 
Description. — Shell small, moderately elevated, turbiniform. Spire rather low, 
consisting of three or four rather quickly increasing whorls. Suture deep, obtuse. 
Whorls rounded, subquadrate, sloping out flatly from the suture, very convex on 
the shoulder, slightly convex on the back, and curving in rapidly to the base. 
Sinus-band situated about the middle of the back, some distance above the lower 
suture, narrow, concave, and excavate. Ornament consisting of four or five strong 
distant spiral ridges above the sinus-band, and more numerous similar ridges below 
it and on the base ; crossed and decussated above the sinus-band by similar, distant, 
transverse ridges which slope obliquely backwards from the suture. Mouth sub- 
circular. Columella arched. Umbilicus very small. Shell-structure rather thick. 
Size. — Height 8 mm., width 9 mm. 
Locality. — There are two worn specimens in the Museum of Practical Greology, 
one of which is on the same slab of rock as a specimen of Scoliostoma texatum. 
Bemarhs. — The specimen from which the above description is taken has 
suffered much from decortication, but the ornamentation can be fairly seen. 
It appears to agree fairly well with the smaller figure which Phillips gives of 
PL cancellata, and there seems to be no doubt that it belongs to that species. 
Whether Phillips' second figure does not belong to a diflerent species appears to 
be doubtful. It represents a very much larger and more definitely cancellated 
shell. It is clear from his drawing that it came from Wolborough. 
In the same year that Phillips described this species Miinster^ described another 
shell under the same name from the St. Cassian beds. To the latter shell d'Orbigny" 
> 1841, Miinster, ' Beitr.,' pt. 4, p. 113, pi. xii, lig. 13. 
^ 1849, d'Orbigny, ' Prodrome,' vol. i, p. 195. 
38 
