446 NOTES ON PROSOBRANCHIATA, 



therefore unquotable. Fischer (n, 206) reviewed the ' Museum 

 Boltenianum,' and came to this conclusion; and Dall's sentence, 

 *' There is no good reason why we should not adopt the name 

 proposed by Bolten, given a scientific standing by Link, and 

 adopted by Cuvier " (7, 225); and his repeated rejection of Bolten's 

 noinina nuda points to his being of the same opinion. (The italics 

 are mine.) The name to which the above sentence refers is 

 Tritonium. He has since regarded the name as preoccupied at 

 the time of its proposal, and inadmissible on that account (8, 4:16). 



With reference to Aquillus, I cannot do better than quote 

 Harris (15, 186): — "Commencing with Aquillus, the etymology 

 of the word is uncertain, and in any case is hybrid. When it is 

 emended in the manner suggested by Agassiz (2, p.31, Moll. p. 7) and 

 others, we have Aquilus or Aquila, which is anticipated by the 

 well known Aquila, Brisson, in ornithology, and by several other 

 authors prior to the appearance of Montfort's work. To prevent 

 difficulty, therefore, it is not advisable to select Aquillus, the 

 more so that Montfort suggested another name at the same time, 

 in the same work which will do very well." 



The next name on my list, which is arranged chronologically, 

 is Lotorium, which is not preoccupied, is proposed in a thoroughly 

 scientific manner, and for which a type (Murex lotorium, Linn.) 

 is named, described and figured. Triton is preoccupied; Septa 

 and Laiyipusia were proposed subsequent to Lotorium. 



I am of the opinion that Harris is right in maintaining that 

 Lotorium should be accepted. With this conclusion both Messrs. 

 E. A. Smith {fide Harris, I.e.) and C. Hedley agree. 



Until a generic nonien nudum is absolutely defined there will 

 be an element of uncertainty in this synonymy. Verrill (38, 54) 

 says Bolten worked in a rational manner, and that " he gave no 

 diagnoses, but he cited well known and figured species as types, 

 so that his meaning is clear." If this is so, and it constitutes a 

 generic description, Montfort's name must give place to that of 

 Bolten. It is a point which can, it seems, be only settled finally 

 by a consultation of a few malacologists of experience, and a 

 careful consideration of the consequences, rather than a rigid 



