90 AMERICAN JOURNAL 



Sp. 44. M. cineta, Kiener. To say that this "inhabits 

 Mexico," leaves us in doubt whether it be an Atlantic or Pacific 

 species. It doubtless inhabits the Caribbean cost of Mexico, 

 but its province includes the Antilles and the northern coast of 

 S. America. Cande and d'Orbigny quote it from the Antilles, 

 C. B. Adams collected it in Jamaica, I have it from Carthagena, 

 S. Am., Krebs received it from St. Martha, and Newton col- 

 lected it at Maracaibo. 



iSj)- 45. 31. jyrunum, Gmel. The only locality quoted by 

 Reeve for this species is Panama. The Panama shell of this type 

 is well known to be M. sajpotilla, Hinds, a species so closely 

 allied indeed to 31. jjnmuni, that some would question its specific 

 validity. Mr. Reeve has, however, adopted the 31. sapotilla as 

 a good species, justly as I think, and has correctly assigned it 

 to its proper province — Panama. It is in fact the Pacific analogue 

 of the Caribbean 31. prunum, and it is surprising that Sowerby 

 and Reeve should both have neglected to record the latter as 

 coming from the Caribbean province, Avhere it is one of the most 

 abundant species, being indeed the best known and the typical 

 species of the genus. And as they have each blundered in 

 ascribing it to Panama, so it is even more surprising that almost 

 all their predecessors from Gmelin down refer it only to the 

 island of Goree, West Africa, where I feel confident in asserting 

 that it never occurs. That this locality should have passed un- 

 questioned for more than sixty years may be thus explained. 

 Gmelin' s description confounds two distinct species, viz., the 

 M. amygdala^ Kiener, which abounds on the coast of Sene- 

 gambia, and the true 31. prununi, or what is usually considered 

 such, [M. coerulescens, Lam.), which is the Caribbean species. 

 Gmeliu's description though vague, best applies to the latter, and 

 the dimension he gives (IJ inches long) can only agree with 

 that. Of his cited figures, the first is the Egouen of Adanson, 

 which Adanson says is only 9 lines in length, and which is 

 clearly Kiener's 31. amygdala. The second figure referred to 

 is that of Lister, which represents an immature 31. prunum, 

 while the third is that of Martini, which is unquestionably M. 

 prunum. Gmelin then copies Adanson's locality " Goree " for 

 the species, which in turn has been blindly repeated by Dillwyn, 

 Wood, Lamarck and Kiener. Petit, in his Catalogue, Jour, de 

 Conch, ii, 53, has been the first to set this matter right, by re- 

 moving Adanson's Ugouen to its proper place with Kiener's 

 species. On the distribution of 31. prunum and M. sapotilla, 

 see also C. B. Adams, in Ann. N. Y. Lye. Nat. Hist, v, 265. 



Sp. 48. 31. quadrilineata. Mr. Reeve does not inform us 



