48 



HemarlcS on Certain Species of 



that many years ago Mr. Phillii^s had charge of the cabinet, 

 and so labelled the specimen referred to, but had since admitted 

 his determination to be erroneous. 



With respect to II. inornata Say, described as " subglobose,"' 

 and having " a strong resemblance to //. ligeva^'^ I cannot ac- 

 quiesce in the opinion that it has been correctly identified by 

 Dr. Binney. I have already stated my belief that Say's inor- 

 nata is the II. laevigata Kaf., the species confounded b}^ Dr. B, 

 with H. luGuhrata Say. On a future occasion I propose to ex- 

 amine these questions more fully, but desire now to place on 

 record the following interesting points relating to them. 



When Dr. Binney was in Paris, he examined the shells in 

 the Museum at the Jardin des Plantes, and among his notes 

 made at the time, and now in the possession of his son, is the 

 following, — "ZT. inornata Saj^ is represented by the shell which 

 I have figured as II. lucubrata Say." 



Say knew and had a specimen of H. laevigata. In the cabinet 

 of Mr. Poulson, at Philadelphia, there is a specimen, as Mr. W. 

 G. Binney informs me, labelled in Say's handwriting " Helix, — 

 Claiborne, Ala." 



In 185T, I saw at the Academy specimens of H. Icsvigata^ 

 labelled by Phillips, II. inornata Say. 



For the present I leave II. glaphyra Say in the catalogue of 

 I^orth American Helices, as one which cannot be identified 

 with absohite certainty, but under a strong impression that it 

 is identical with II. iiioimata Binney. 



It may be said that the question discussed at so much length 

 is of little real importance, but if by showing how Say's species 

 have been misunderstood, I promote a more careful study of 

 his writino;s. I at least shall be satisfied. 



