BY C HEDLEY. 717 



Cerithium tomlini, sp.nov. 

 (Plate Ixxxv., fig.89.) 



Since writing a note on Cerithium novcB-hihernicH Adams, (an<ea, 

 xxxviii., p. 290) I have benefited by correspondence with Mr. J. 

 R. Le B. Tomlin on the subject. 



It appears that, in the first place, the name was never pub- 

 lished by Arthur Adams, and should be cited as of Sowerby. 

 Secondly, Sowerby, under this name, figured two species, to either 

 of which his vague description might apply. It will be, there- 

 fore, advantageous now to declare the type of Cerithium novce- 

 hibernice Sowerby, to be that single shell presented to the South 

 Kensington Museum by H. Harvey from the Hanley Collection, 

 and ticketed with an old label on the underside, reading, "novse- 

 hibernise S., eburneus K." This type is the original of fig.84, 

 PI. clxxx., of the second volume of the Thesaurus. Thirdly, Mr. 

 Tomlin says that this figure 84 is not a good one, and that the 

 original of it is quite different from any form of eburneum Brug., 

 and could not be identified with any other Cerithium in the 

 Museum. Finally, that the locality " Florida," now attached to 

 the specimen, was merely added by Mr. Smith from the Thesau- 

 rus, and that he does not now regard it as reliable. 



The other half (Fig. 85) of Sowerby's compound species is a 

 shell from the Cuming Collection, and was apparently the original 

 of fig. 68, Plate x., of Cerithium, in the Conchological Iconica. 

 This species now finds itself without a name, and is here called 

 after the able conchologist who assisted me to unravel its com- 

 plicated history. 



Cerithium tomlini is related to its associate, C. nodulosum 

 Bruguiere, from which it diffei^ by smaller size, less massive 

 habit, and more numerous, more compressed tubercles. 



Mr. G. F. Harris* and Dr. W. H. Dallf point out that Bru- 

 guiere, who introduced the genus Cerithium, indicated no type 

 among the 45 species assigned to it, that Lamarck exercised the 

 privilege of first reviser in 1799, and instituted Murex aluco 



♦Harris, Cat. Tert. Moll. Austr. Brit. Mus., i., 1897, p.224. 

 fDall, Proc. Nat. Sci. Philad., 1907, p. 364. 



