BY C. HEDLEY. 521 



than the original figure; it is peculiar to the coast of New South 

 Wales, whereas //. roei is exclusively a West Australian species. 

 It further seems to me that //. rubicundus Montfort, should 

 replace the later H. tricostalis Lamarck. Montfort's name, 

 which Pilsbry marked as very doubtful, was recognised and 

 accepted by Dr. J. E. Gray,"^ who had unusual facilities for 

 ascertaining the facts of the case. 



Emarginula incisura a. Adams. 

 A. Adams, Proc, Zool. Soc. 1851, p.84. 



No locality was known for this species when it was announced 

 by A. H. Cookef from the Gulf of Suez. It was afterwards 

 reported by E. A. Smith J from the Maldives. 



All these records were based on single specimens. But Mr. G. 

 Gross has shown me numerous examples which he gathered in 

 Moreton Bay. It has been obtained also at Caloundra, Queens- 

 land, by Mr. H. L. Kesteven. Since, at the time the species was 

 described, the London market was flooded with the Moreton Bay 

 shells of F. Strange, it is probable that the type was a Queens- 

 land shell. 



Emarginula dilecta A. Adams. 

 (Plate xxxiii., figs. 37-38). 



This species was originally described^ from King George's 

 Sound, W.A., and was afterwards figured by Sowerby.|| It was 

 added to our fauna by Angas,^ who again announced it as*a 

 fresh discovery,*"^ and remarked laterff that he had in the first 

 instance mistaken E. Candida A. Ad., for this species. Tenison 



* Gray, King's Survey Trop. Austr. Append, ii. 1827, p. 495. 



t Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (5), xvi., 1885, p.271. 



X Fauna Geogr. Maldive & Laccadive Arch. ii. 1903, p. 618. 



§ Proc. Zool. Soc. 1851 (1852), p. 85. 



II Thes. Conch, iii. 1863, pl.245, f.5. 



U Proc. Zool. Soc. 1867, p.219. 



** Proc. Zool. Soc. 1871, p. 97. 



ft Proc. Zool. Soc. 1877, p. 189. 



