BY C. HEDLEY. 315 



These agree with two specimens, subsequently presented by Angas, 

 being the actual types of Ultra tatei Angas. I did not see the type 

 of M. analogica, and am not prepared to reduce tatei to a synonym 

 of that species. Attention is drawn to the subject for future 

 examination. 



Mitra sculptilis Reeve. 



Mitra sculptilis Reeve, Conch. Icon, ii., 1845, PL xxxv., fig. 290. 



Mitra delicata A. Adams, Proc. Zool. Soc, 1852, (1853), p. 137; 

 Id., Hedley, These Proceedings, xxxiii., 1908, p. 484, PI. vii., fig. 1. 



In his original description, Adams reported M. delicata as 

 dredged by Jukes in 8 fathoms, off Cape York. The Challenger 

 Expedition reported M. sculptilis from 3-12 fathoms, off Cape 

 York. In the British Museum, M. sculptilis is represented by two, 

 probably types but not so marked. These are identical with the 

 shell I figured for delicata, which name should be dropped in 

 synonymy. 



Mitra scitula A. Adams,* has similar sculpture, but is smaller 

 and more fusiform. Another relation is M. obeliscus Reeve. 



Mitra hebes Reeve. 



Mitra hebes Reeve, Conch. Icon., ii., 1845, PL 35, fig. 292; Id., 

 Brazier, These Proceedings, i., 1877, p. 209. 



Mitra hamillei Petit, Journ. de Conch., ii., 1851, p. 259, PL vii., 

 fig. 9. 



In the British Museum are three tj'pes, so marked, of M. hebes. 

 Beneath this tablet is noted " = M. hamillei, Petit, Journ. Conch, 

 ii., 1859, t. 7, f . 9. Cape Verd Is., Petit, 1851 : Whydah, N.C. of 

 Africa, Capt. Knocker; Angola, Ausorge." In view of this state- 

 ment, it appears as if the ascription, by" Brazier, of M. hebes from 

 Darnley Island, was wrong, and that the mention of "Mitra hai- 

 nillei Petit" by Shirley from Cardwell, Queensland, was also an 

 error,! as was afterwards acknowledged. 



* Schepman, Siboga Prosobranchiata, 1911, p. 285, Pl.xxii., fig.8. 

 t Shirley, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensland, xxiii., 1911, p. 101; xxiv., 1913, 

 p.56. 



