BY C. HEDLEY. 263 



In the United States, I was most hospitably entertained by 

 American conchologists. At Washington, in the National 

 Museum, Dr. P. Bartsch kindly assisted me to trace the unfigured 

 Australian, or reputed Australian, species described by Dr. A. 

 A. Gould. 



The following are detailed notes, mostly from South Ken- 

 sington : — 



Nucula consobrina A. Adams <fc Angas. 

 (Plate xvi., figs.l, 2, 3.) 



Nucula consobrina A. Adams &, Angas, Proc. Zool. Soc, 1863, 

 p.427.; Id., Angas, Proc. Zool. Soc, 1867, p.932. 



An illustration is here presented of this hitherto unfigured 

 species, reported by its junior author from the Parramatta River 

 and Port Stephens. It is drawn from the type in the British 

 Museum, presented by G. F. Angas, which is 8*5 long, and 

 7 mm. high. 



Nucula simplex A. Adams. 

 (Plate xvi., figs. 4, 5, 6.) 



Nucula simplex A. Adams, Proc. Zool. Soc, 1856, p. 52; Id., 

 Sowerby, Conch. Icon., xviii., 1870, PL iii., f.21; Id., Hanley, 

 Thes. Conch, iii., 1860, p.158, PI. 229, f.137; Id., Angas, Proc. 

 Zool. Soc, 1877, p.193. 



Nucida Strang ei A. Adams, in Hanley, Thes. Conch., iii., 1860, 

 p.158, P1.229, f.125; Id., Angas, Proc Zool. Soc, 1867, p.932; 

 Id., Smith, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (6) xvi., 1895, p. 16. 



Nucula antipodum Hanley, Thes. Conch., iii., 1860, p. 159, PI. 

 230, f.155. 



This species was described as found by F. Strange at Sydney 

 The figures of it are not good, so I present a drawing of a speci- 

 men from the Cuming Collection, labelled N. simplex, and pro- 

 bably a type, though not distinguished as such, in length 9 -5, in 

 height 7 mm. 



After careful examination of the series at South Kensington, 

 I am satisfied that neither Nucula Strang ei nor N. antipodum 

 can be separated from N. simplex. On the tablet of antipodum 

 is written " common in mud at 3 fms., Port Stephens." 



