28 
Annals of the Transvaal Museum 
Sow. ; however, the resemblance between the type of lobe-line of this species 
and that of Haueviceras Gardeni becomes striking when a complete lobe-line 
of the last (Text-fig. 15) is compared. 
In detail, however, there is a lot of difference. Except the differences 
mentioned by Kossmat (12, p. 188) I regard also the following as important. 
In Puzosia planulaia Sow. the external saddle reaches further forwards than 
the first lateral one, while in HaueHcevas this is the reverse. The internal 
saddles also reach further forwards. In P. planulaia the external secondary 
saddle in the first lateral lobe reaches further forwards than the internal one ; 
in Haueviceras this is the reverse. 
Yokoyama remarks lx., that in the figures given by Stoliczka and Baily 
the umbilical surface is steep but not vertical to the plane of S3nnmetry, 
whereas in all Japanese forms and in an Indian form examined by him, the 
umbilical surface is vertical to the plane of symmetry. In our collection both 
types are represented. In a large specimen the umbihcal surface of an earher 
whorl is practically vertical to the plane of symmetry, while that of its last 
whorl is inclined. 
Measurements of our largest specimen: 
Diameter 
120 mm. 
(I-OO) 
Height of last whorl ... 
41 
( 0 - 34 ) 
Thickness of last whorl 
21 
(0-17) 
Height of penultimate whorl ... 
23 
( 0 - 19 ) 
Thickness of penultimate whorl 
II -5 » 
(o-io) 
Diameter of umbilicus ... 
47*5 .. 
(0-40) 
It is remarkable that no specimens of Haueviceras Rembda Forbes sp. have 
been found. There are, however, two small specimens, which might belong 
here. In one of these the old mouth-edge is nearly straight except for a very 
slight anterior convexity on the middle of the flank; in the other the old 
mouth-edge consists of two radial pieces of which the ends, near the middle 
of the flank, are connected by a short, oblique cross-piece. Apparently there 
is a considerable irregularity in these mouth-edges. 
Genus SCAPHITES Parkinson. 
Scaphites Cunliffei Forbes sp. PI. V, figs. 5 — 7, text-fig. 16. 
1845. Ammonites Cunlijfei Forbes, Foss. Inv. South. India, p. 109, PI. VIII, 
fig. 2 a — d. 
1845. Ammonites Havana Forbes, ibid. p. no, PI. VII, fig. 5 a — b. 
1865. Ammonites Cunlijfei Stoliczka, 4 , p. 97, PI. L, fig. 3. 
1897. Scaphites Cunliffei and Scaphites Havana Kossmat, 12, p. 138. 
1907. Scaphites Cunliffei Pervinquiere, 18 , p. 124, PI. IV, figs. 36 — 42, A, B, C. 
There are two specimens in the collection, which so much resemble the 
variety Havana of Scaphites Cunliffei Forbes sp. as described by Pervinquiere, 
that I can only place them here. 
The section of the whorl is quadrangular with rounded off angles, much 
higher than broad. The sides are flattened and the external surface is slightly 
convex. The shell of the best preserved specimen consists of nearly five whorls. 
The greater part of the last whorl is covered with fairly strong ribs, which are 
convex forwards near the middle of the flanks and on the external surface. 
Short ribs are intercalated here and there between the others; they are well 
visible on the external surface, but die out before reaching the middle of the 
flanks. The convex portion of the ribs near the middle of the flanks is somewhat 
