Notes on South African Mollusca. 119 



(Milligan) ; Portland, Victoria (Cox) ; North coast of Tasmania 

 (Brazier) and Cossacks, West Australia (Woodward) ; while 

 examples almost exactly intermediate between the type and the 

 variety have been found in New South Wales at Freemantle (Kemp) 

 and Coogee Bay (Brazier). 



The species is further recorded from King Island (Tate & May), 

 and Shoalhaven and Port Jackson (Angas) ; but I cannot tell which 

 forms are to be referred to these localities. 



There is also a typical set in the British Museum labelled " New 

 Zealand" (Hancock, 1856), but, although the authority is said to be 

 reliable, it is very doubtful indeed whether living specimens have 

 ever reached the Dominion. 



It is earnestly to be hoped that the whole question of the 

 distribution and varieties of M. xanthostoma will be taken up by 

 some of the great Australian conchologists, and the anatomy 

 examined with a view to the determination of its true generic 

 position. 



Distribution of Marinula. It would hence appear that Marinula 

 is a truly Antarctic genus, originating in the Australasian region, 

 with a circurnpolar range extending eastward through New Zealand 

 to Chiloe, and westward through St. Paul's and Amsterdam Islands 

 and South Africa to Gough Island and Tristan d'Acunha. In the 

 sole case where it extends northward, e.g. M. xanthostoma, the shell 

 tends to lose its distinctive shape and to merge into Phytia ; while 

 in Africa and America it is confined to the extreme south of the 

 continent and retains its normal form. 



Its habit seems to be entirely marine, and it is questionable 

 whether the genus would not be better included among marine, 

 rather than non-marine Mollusca. 



It now only remains to deal with the mis-named Cumingian shells 

 which have been the cause of so much confusion. I have already 

 mentioned that these occupy three tablets in the British Museum ; 

 one contains three larger shells from Tumaco Island, Colombia, and 

 each of the others two smaller specimens, from "Chile" and an 

 unknown locality respectively, which appear to be inseparable from 

 the Tumaco examples. 



We know that the Tumaco shells constitute the Type set of 

 Auricula rechiziana, Petit; but Pfeiffer considered them to be 

 identical with Conovulus triplicatus, Anton, which was described 

 from the River Maule, Chile, in 1839. This appears to be correct, 



