116 THE NAUTILUS. 



Of these 1 = z Pupilla, 1831 ; 2 and 3 == Sphyradium, 1837 ; 5 

 and 6 = Vertigo Miiller, 1774 ; leaving only 4, minutissima, which 

 becomes the type. All the eliminations antedate Gray in 1847, 

 who named palastris (== antivertigo} as type too late. Herrmannsen 

 says that muscorum and antivertigo are the types, and that Beck re- 

 stricted it to antivertigo. The latter statement is an error, as Beck 

 did not restrict the group at all, or name any type, giving a hetero- 

 geneous list much like that of Jeffreys. 



The correction of hordacea " Gabb " to hordeacea " Sterki, not 

 Gabb," may be allowed in view of the data given by Dr. Pilsbry, 

 but, in a general way, when a species, not of the writer's own, is 

 mentioned by an author without further data as type of a new group, 

 it is, I think, essential not to "go behind the returns," as any other 

 way must lead to hopeless confusion. 



Mv notes in the article referred to, were condensed from some 

 hundred pages of synonymic data, and no attempt was made to give 

 more than the barest outline of the cases cited. Bui in every case 

 good reasons can be adduced for the position taken, though no one is 

 less ready to claim infallibility than the present author. 



THE PUPILLID.E OF EISSO AND JEFFREYS. 



BY HENRY A. PILSBRY. 



The first attempt at a difficult and involved problem often falls 

 short of a complete solution, through the omission of some obscure or 

 apparently irrelevant factor bearing upon the matter; but the work 

 done clears the way for another student to approach the task more 

 advantageously. A discussion like the present one upon the Pupae 

 is not properly to be called a controversy. It is a symposium, to 

 which various students bring their several portions of fact, observa- 

 tion and deduction, to the end that harmonious structure may be 

 built more symmetrical than any formed by a single effort. 



My former paper upon Pupillidse (NAUTILUS, January, p. 105), 

 was faulty in two respects: first, in ascribing " new errors" to Dr. 

 Dall, for I propose to show that the errors largely antedate his work, 

 and second, in my failure to give at length my reasons for certain 

 identifications of some of Risso's names. These reasons I will pro- 



