DISPERSAL BY MAN. 237 



southern partSf hut are not found In the nortJieni parts 

 of this island. 



" In Surrey^ as before mentioned, they abound ; in 

 several other counties they are not uncommon, as in 

 Oxfordshire, especially about Woodstock and Bladen ; 

 in Gloucestershire, in Chedzvorth parish, and about Frog 

 Mill ; in Dorsetshire, etc., but I have never heard that 

 they are yet met with in any of the nortJiern countiesT 



Pulteney, in his Dorsetshire catalogue of 1799, gave 

 the species along with the other Helices, and made no 

 statement as to whether he considered it indigenous or 

 introduced, but, after stating that it had been recorded 

 for Dorsetshire, added, ''happily this kind does not 

 thrive well in England." He neither followed Pennant 

 in naming the creature ''exotic " nor Da Costa in calling 

 it " Italian/' giving instead the more appropriate 

 English name of" Edible snail;" but Donovan, following 

 in 1801, again called the animal " Italian or exotic," 

 and agreed with Pennant and Da Costa in regarding it 

 as an importation. By whom it was first introduced, 

 he remarked, was uncertain. In 1803, Montagu, in his 

 " Testacea Britannica " — " next to Miiller one of the 

 best works on land and fresh-water shells " — wrote in a 

 similar strain, remarking that the creature was "first 

 introduced about the middle of the sixteenth century 

 either as an article of food or for medical purposes," 

 and repeating the stories told by Pennant and Da Costa 

 respecting the reputed doings of Sir K. Digby and Mr. 

 Howard. Dr. Maton and the Rev. Mr. Rackett, in 

 their catalogue read at the Linnean Society in 1804, 



