Iredale.— Suler's " Manual uf the New Zealand Mollusca." 435 



1843," a name for some unknown reason quite ignored by Pilsbry. In 

 the Eevue de Zool., 1843 (Sept.), p. 259, Recluz diagnosed a group and 

 named it " Montforti (Nobis). Les Subemarginales Blainville." He wrote, 

 ' : De cette section . . . nous eonnaissons six especes . . . Em. 

 emarginata Blainv., Em. panki [sic] Quoy. Em. australis Quoy, Em. tricostata 

 Sow. (Patella tricostata Gmelin), Em. depressa Blain. et la suivante . . 

 Nous proposerions de donner a ce nouveau genre le nOm de Montfortia en 

 l'bonneur de Denis de Montfort." On p. 376 the first line given in corrected 

 to "Montfortia (Nobis). Les Subemarginules (Blainv.)." I designate as 

 type E. australis Quoy and Gaimard, as the Blainvillean species are doubt- 

 fully determined ; Recluz's species are all congeneric, and the name falls 

 as a synonym of Hemitoma. 



I have therefore failed in my search for a name for the " rugosa " group, 

 and therefore propose the new generic name Montfortula, with Emarginula 

 rugosa Quoy and Gaimard as type. My study of the shells available at 

 the British Museum, and my knowledge of the live animals of M. rugosa 

 (Q. & G.), with species of Emarginula. leads me to state that there is a 

 greater alliance between species of Montfortula and Emarginula than between 

 Montfortula and Hemitoma. whilst Subemarginula Gray, 1847, I suggest 

 differs greatly. As a matter of fact, it is quite probable that study of the 

 shells classed under Emarginula would cause the degradation of Montfortula 

 to subgeneric rank under that genus. T have to consider many species of 

 Emarginula in the Lord Howe Island fauna, when I will carefully deal with 

 that aspect of the case. 



The alterations necessary may be summarized thus : Omit Subemarginula 

 Blainville, 1825, with its synonymy, and Clypidina Gray with its reference, 

 and read, — 



Genus Montfortula nov. 



Montfortula rugosa (Quoy and Gaimard, 1834). 

 Genus Tugalia Gray, 1843, em. 



Tugalia parmophoidea (Quoy and Gaimard, 1834). 



intermedia (Reeve, 1842). 



The synonyms given under M. rugosa Q. & G. may not be all correct, but 

 I will attend to those later. 



With regards to Tugalia intermedia (Reeve, 1842), Suter says, " The 

 type is from Port Jackson." In tbe original description, however, the 

 locality given is " I. of Bohol, Philippines." The type should be in the 

 Mus. Cuming, preserved in the British Museum, but I have not yet traced 

 it. I mention this as there are Philippine species of this genus. 



Genus Trochus (Linne, 1758). [P. 106.] 



The classification utilized by Suter is that put forward by Pilsbry in the 

 " Manual of Conchology " twenty-odd years previously, and is one which, 

 as regards generic and subgeneric values, has been discarded for many years 

 even by Pilsbry himself. No recent malacologist, however conservative 

 he may be, sinks Clanculus as a subgenus of Trochus. A criticism of the 

 series presented in the British Museum shows the species generally classed 

 under Trochus to resolve themselves into three distinct rather large groups 

 and several distinct smaller ones. 



The generally accepted type of Linne's Trochus I have shown to be 

 untenable, as it does not occur in the Linnean genus, and therefore to cause 

 the least confusion I designated as type of Trochus Linne (Syst. Nat., ed. x, 



