i8o 



HARDWICKE'S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



times the opinion of the conchological world were 

 invited as to the advisability of accepting names 

 proposed in the interval, and these names rejected or 

 accepted as it might be found convenient. But the 

 worst of it is that people will follow their own 

 opinion in such matters, whatever others say. It 

 may be asked here, what are the convenient names, 

 and which the inconvenient ones ? In my opinion 

 the convenient ones are those which apply to varieties 

 which are widely distributed, and consequently have 

 often to be referred to, or for any other reason often 

 spoken of, and which express as well as a single word 

 can express, the leading feature of the form in 

 question. Constantly recurring monstrosities I would 

 place in the same category. Names which I would 

 reject are those which refer to a single specimen, no 

 similar one having been found ; but of course, should 

 the form be found afterwards in several places, the 



tincta, St. Nicholas Marsh (S. C. Cockerell). In these 

 specimens the suture is exceedingly shallow. Var. 

 albida, Minster (S. C. C). I have taken it at Sand- 

 wich. Monst. decollaium, Barnes. Monst. carinatuni. 

 Mr. J. W. Taylor described this from a specimen found 

 by my brother in a pond at Bromley. I have searched 

 this pond, but have not found another carinate 

 specimen, although the type is common enough ; but 

 while looking for carinatum I found another mon- 

 strosity, equally curious. It was a turretid specimen, 

 which may be described as follows : — Shell about 

 half an inch in length, whorls 5, spire turretid, suture 

 deep, last whorl more than half the total length of 

 the shell, and flattened at the sides, instead of being, 

 rounded, as in a typical specimen. The upper whorls 

 are somewhat eroded. 



This specimen reminds one of a monstrosity {im- 

 perial, I think it is called), of Buccinum undatutn, 



Fig. 118. — Limiura glutinosa, mnn«.t. 

 " intortum." S. Nicholas Marsh, 

 E. Kent. 



Fig. 119. — Limnaa fevcgra, small 

 variety. Sub-alpine stream, Bail- 

 don, Yorkshire. 



Fig. 120. — Limntra peregra, var. 

 labiosa. Bromley. 



Fig. 121. — Limncpastagnalis, 

 var. " expansa." Bromley, 

 Kent. 



Fig. 122. — Limnaa stagnalis, 

 variety approaching /.. 

 Jialustris in shape. Chisle- 

 hurst. 



Fig. 123. — Limitaasfagnahs, 

 var. " elegantula." Chisle- 

 hurst. 



Fig. 124. — Limna'a />atus- 

 tris, monst. " turritum." 



name might again be taken up. Also those which 

 do not clearly express what is meant in the description 

 given for them, as var. major, "shell larger than 

 type," without saying how large, or var. clongata, 

 "shell elongated," when no length is stated, and also 

 all those named after the discoverer, or anyone else, 

 such as Clausilia rugosa, var. Everetti, "shell smaller 

 than type." So in the names I have suggested above, 

 I do not for a moment propose that they shall be 

 used on the strength of one or two specimens, but 

 merely propose them as useful names, should it be 

 found at any future period convenient to use them. 



Limmca palustris. Var. conica has been taken in 

 the Thames. Some which I took in a ditch near the 

 river at Putney, Mr. Kenneth McKean considers to 

 belong to this variety, but although they are lighter 

 than usual, they are hardly greyish-white, and the 

 suture is, if anything shallower than usual. Var. 



and gives the idea of a specimen which had become 

 telescopic, and had got partially shut up. If it is to 

 be named, it might be called monst. turritum.* 

 Monst. globosum, Taylor, Enfield, one specimen 

 (S. C. Cockerell). Although this was described as a- 

 variety, I have no doubt whatever that it is really a 

 monstrosity, and my brother is of the same opinion. 

 My brother has taken two specimens of a very inte- 

 resting variety, which has the whorls compressed, 

 the suture perfectly flat, and the periphery bluntly 

 angulated ; in fact, this form bears exactly the same 

 relation to L. palustris type, as Bucci7ium acumin- 

 atum bears to the typical undatum. (The corre- 

 spondence between the abnormalities of L. palustris 

 and B. undatum is very curious, especially as the two 

 species are so distantly related.) 



* Kreglinger mentions a \ar. itirrita, which may possibly 

 be identical with the form here described. 



