418 Transactions. 



and I know of no other recent worker who has followed this practice. In 

 some cases Mr. Suter has given a note remarking his action, but in a few 

 cases he has omitted to do so. In every case, of course, Mr. Suter's action 

 is contrary to the International Eules, and the earliest name must be 

 reinstated. 



The succeeding notes are to a great extent nomenclatural, and I want 

 here to emphasize the invaluable aid that the " Index Animalium," by 

 C. Davies Sherborn, must be to the Neozelanic student. Many of the 

 errors here corrected would have been just as easily amended by systematic 

 workers in New Zealand had reference been continually made to Sherborn's 

 priceless work. By means of it they can be practically assured of names 

 prior to 1800. 



I am placed in a peculiarly favourable position, as, in addition to the 

 published work, I have access to Mr. Sherborn's continuous labour, and 

 also obtain his unique advice upon bibliographic work. No words can 

 express the gratitude I feel, and it must be understood that many of the 

 following notes are due to Mr. Sherborn's initiative, and depend entirely 

 upon his work, freely given at every opportunity. 



I also desire to record the invaluable assistance Mr. E. A. Smith, I.S.O., 

 of the British Museum, has given me. Many of the notes here given are 

 based on his unequalled knowledge of molluscan forms and literature. In 

 every case of doubt I have consulted Mr. Smith, and in no case have I 

 written anything save the results of our considered judgment. 



The majority of my notes are novel, but in order that my commentary 

 should cover the recent work done I have included items published by 

 Hedley, Smith, and myself which have appeared since or are not incor- 

 porated in the Manual. I give here only those notes which I consider 

 complete at the time of writing — viz., the 15th September, 1914. I mention 

 this as it is certain that some of them will be out of date before publication 

 in June, 1915. 



Suter has remarked on p. 941, "I think it is more in the interests of 

 science to separate a number of more or less distinct forms which are pro- 

 duced by differences in their environments. Too much lumping does not 

 tend to advance scientific knowledge." I emphatically endorse this state- 

 ment, and would apply the principle to the usage of restricted genera and 

 subgenera. I would draw attention to the extraordinary action of British 

 malacologists who, when dealing with Antipodean material, have lumped, 

 as regards genera, in the most casual manner. Yet when classifying the 

 British molluscan fauna, both land and marine, the same workers have 

 utilized to the extreme limit restricted genera and subgenera. 



I herewith propose many new groups, which are all the result of study 

 of the Neozelanic forms in conjunction with extra-limital species, and I 

 bleieve the usage of these groups will tend to advance our knowledge. 



I have been compelled to make continual reference to my papers in 

 the Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, where the technical 

 details of the matters are fully discussed. As the Proceedings of this society 

 may not be commonly available throughout New Zealand, I will gladly 

 forward copies of my papers to any reader interested in Neozelanic mala- 

 cology. Any requests addressed care of British Museum (Natural History), 

 South Kensington, London, S.W., would always reach me. 



Some of the succeeding notes may appear rather lengthy, but I have 

 incorporated many extracts explanatory of my conclusions, as I know 

 such cannot be easily referred to, and they will aid the New Zealand worker 



