Smuii : Catalogue of Gf.nus Partui.a. 433 



as a synonym of fusca, to whii h f^rotca was also referred : this was 

 partly owing to erroneous labels in the Pease and other collections, 

 which were repeated in the Hartman cabinet. When, later, he sepa- 

 rated ovalis (MS. Catalogue), it does not appear that he corrected his 

 labels to correspond with the separation. Hence No. 4127, though 

 labeled P. ovalis, may really belong with No. 41 1 1 among the varieties 

 oi P. fi/scit. See notes under 4128, below. 



4128. ''Partiila fusca Pse. (typical), Raiatea, Coll. Pse." On the 

 back of the card is written : "The type fusca in Coll. Pse. are like 

 these and = ovalis Pse. These are the young of ovalis.'' Six speci- 

 mens, all somewhat immature and uniform dark castaneous in color. 

 See Hartman, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sc. Phila. , 1885, pp. 207-208, 

 where he observes: "The type examples oi fusca (Coll. Pse.) are 

 immature shells of the uniform dark fuscous ovalis, two quarts of which 

 were included in the Pease duplicates, labeled P. ovalis by Pease. 

 The shell is solid, of a uniform dark chestnut-brown or fuscous color, 

 with a white expanded lip, and the pillar tooth is alxsent. I have seen 

 several suites labeled y>ora, from the hands of Mr. Pease, in which the 

 banded ovalis z.viA protea predominated." 



Mr. Garrett wrote (Jan. 25, 1885) : " After Pease sent his nine sets 

 of Partula to London he had no duplicates lef: oi fusca or cilrina.'" 

 It is, perhaps, impossible to identify the form which I'ease originally 

 described as P. ovalis ; he did not figure it, and his description would 

 apply to varieties of two or three species. Through shifting of labels or 

 carelessness, two or three distinct forms among his duplicates became 

 known by this name. Dr. Hartman supposed it to be a shell which he 

 long regarded as a variety of P. fusca Pse., but e\entually separated 

 as a valid species in his MS. work ; it ajj])ears doul)tful, however, 

 whether he made a corresponding change in his labels. As nearly as 

 can be ascertained, the shells which he meant to separate as ovalis are 

 No. 4126, labeled ovalis, and No. 4128, \dih t\td fusca ; No. 4127, 

 labeled ovalis, is doubtful and may eventually be referred io fusca ; No. 

 4125, labeled ovalis, is certainly not that species. 



Most of the Peasean names were adopted from Garrett's provisional 

 ones, but this was not the ca.se with ovalis ; hence Garrett, when he 

 sold his collection to Pease, retained no duplicates with that label. 

 Subsequently he attempted to identify it from the description, but was 

 never quite sure, as appears from his letter of February 10, 1879, 

 in which he says : "I have only five specimens of what I now call the 



