THE NAUTILUS. 53 



Suhgenus EulimeUa Forbes, 1846 (G). 



Type, EulimeUa crassula Forbes = E. scillcE Scacchi. 



On p. 17 is found the familiar quotation 



(6) EulimeUa Forbes, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. 14, 1846, p. 

 412. This reference appears to have been introduced into literature 

 by Herman nsen; copied by Scudder it lias attained a wide accept- 

 ance, two recent users 1 have noted being Locard (Cat. Moll. Viv. 

 France, 1886, p. 211) and Kobelt (Icon. Schale. Europ. Meeres 

 conchy. Vol. Ill, p. 161, 1903). Yet two errors appear in it: Vol. 

 14 was issued in 1844 and there the genus is not introduced; a shell, 

 Kulima Mac Andrei is described on p. 412 by Forbes. 



The first introduction of EulimeUa is, as given by Marschall, in 

 the Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist,, Vol. XIX, p. 311, 1847, where Jeffreys 

 writes " EulimeUa (Forbes) crassula Mai. and Conch. J. E. Mac 

 Andrei Forbes." 



The incomplete quotation should read " Mai. and Conch. Mag. pi. 

 I, p. 34, 1838," where Jeffreys listed Eulima crassula n. sp. No de- 

 scription was offered and its assignment to Forbes by Dall and 

 Bartsch is incorrect. 



In the P. Z. S., 1847, p. 160, Gray wrote 



"Eulimella Forbes, 1846. . . . Melania scillce. This notice ap- 

 pears to conform with the scant regulation now considered sufficient 

 to carry a generic name so that it would appear that we must quote 

 this genus as of Gray. It may be argued that Jeffreys has prece- 

 dence and it seems doubtful to me to whom should be given the credit. 

 I prefer Gray's quotation. I have searched throughout Forbes' 

 papers from 1844 to 1847 and have been unable to meet with the 

 name. I conclude it was a MS. name, and in support of this view 

 would cite the Hist. Brit. Moll., p. 308, 1850. There the genus is 

 assigned to Forbes; it is well described, and though full references 

 are appended no notice of the previous occurrence in literature of 

 EulimeUa is given save the one by Jeffreys. Dall and Bartsch give 

 as a synonym of EulimeUa, Loxoptyxis Cossmann; the paper they 

 quote was included in the Ann. Soc. Roy. Malac. Belg., Vol. XXIII, 

 for the year 1888, p. 99. What year the Annales appeared in I 

 cannot say, but I noticed that on the title page of those for 1896 is 

 printed " Distribue le 24 decembre 1899." 



As synonymous also is regarded Belonidium Cossmann, Jour, de 

 Conch., Vol. 40, 1892, p. 350. This name appears to have been 



