HELIX. 43 



GENUS HELIX LINN JF. us. 



I have followed the artificial arrangement of species of 

 this genus proposed on p. 92 of vol. ii. 



HELIX MAJOR BINNEY vol. ii. p. 96, pi. 1. 



Helix major DEKAY, N. Y. Moll. p. 45. 



MRS. GRAY, Fig. of Mol. An. pi. 291, fig. 1, abs. desc. ex. Bost. 

 Journ. non major Beck, p. 2. 

 Helix albolabris y PFEIFFER, Symb. ad Hist. Hel. ii. 22; Mon. Hel. Viv. i. 290. 



C. CHEAINITZ, ed. 2, i. 81, (1846). 

 Bdix albolabris DESHAYES, in Fer. in tab. 1. c. 

 REEVE, No. 656, (1852). 

 BLAND, Notes, p. 50, N. Y. Lyceum, vi. 359. 



Well marked specimens of this species are rare in col- 

 lections. It is, perhaps, owing to this fact that so few 

 authors have followed Binney in separating it from H. 

 albolabris. 



For my own part, I am thoroughly convinced of its 

 specific weight. Dr. Newcomb and Dr. Gould agree with 

 me. On the other hand, Bland unites the two. It is sub- 

 ject to variation as are most of our species, and some in- 

 dividuals of H. albolabris may nearly approach some of 

 its extreme forms. I am, however, confident of its being 

 generally acknowledged as soon as it becomes better 

 known. 



The second figure of Ferussac referred to is a correct 

 representation of the species. Deshayes makes no men- 

 tion of it by name in the text of his continuation of that 

 work, but appears to have confounded the two. 



Morch (Cat. Yoldi, p. 7) erroneously gives " H. major, 

 Ohio." 



It is catalogued distinct from albolabris by H. and A. 

 Adams, ii. 206. 



HELIX ALBOLABRIS SAY vol. ii. p. 99, pi. 11. 



Helix albolabris SAY, (Binney's ed.) p. 21, pi. 69, fig. 1. 



ADAMS, in Thompson's Vt. 1, 158, with wood-cut. 



