156 
Bulletin 35 
304 
Ostrea percrassa . — CoxRAD. 
Tertiary Fossils. Page 50, PI, xxv, F. i. 
Our specimens are thick and heavy, but they agree with 
Conrad’s Figure. The name is appropriate. It may po.s.sibly be 
the .same as Ostrea tryonii Gab. (Miocene Fossils 1878, P. 348 
PI. xlv, F. 27). The other two Forms of Oj'Ster found in the 
Page 14 
W’estindian Miocene, O. haitensis O. virginica, do not appear 
in this collection. 
Cardiutu coviprcssiaii Ball. 
Flor. Foss. Pt. V, P. 1109, PI. xlviii, F. 21. 
Area consobrhia . — SowERBY. 
Journ. Geol. Soc. 1850, PI. x, F. 12. 
Dali prefers the name of halidonata (Flor. Fos. Part iii, 
Page 646) and he rejects Gabb’s identification with^. flondana. 
Like most arks the shell is variable but I am satisfied that our 
shell is the one intended by Sowerbyin his Figure. Dali’s figure 
in my opinion does not represent Sowerb3'’s consobrina, which is 
more like his actinophora in shape, though the proportions are 
not exactl}' the same. 
Ra 7 iina cuspidata . — Guppy. 
This crustacean from the Tamana beds was described and 
figured b}’ me in the Bulletin of the Agricultural department, 
1909. 
Balaams porcatus . — Darwin. 
Barnacles probably of this species are not uncommon in the 
miocene deposits and there is a bed comjiosed chiefly of them at 
the Government farm in Tobago. A few specimens are in the 
collection from Springvale. 
Bristis exigmis . — Cotteau. 
Echinides tertiaires de S. Barts, &c., ]!. 35. PI. vi, F. 16-18. 
The examples are large, but are onlj' casts. The species 
was recorded bj- me in 1866 from Anguilla under the name of 
B. dimidiatus from which it differs slightly. 
