CONUS. 



le shell figured by M. Kiener for C.amhiguus at pi. 70, 

 icept that it is not the species intended. 



. Gubba, Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 104. f. 1. 

 This is a very dark variety of C. Bernardi, distinguished 

 f a few small light patches characteristic of that species. 



. hieroglyphicus, Duclos. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. 

 p. 181. 



M. Kiener has correctly illustrated this species at pi. 73, 

 lely granulated and violet-coloured in the aperture, but 

 e shell figured as a variety of it at pi. 103, is quite 

 lother thing. Mr. Cuming has recently obtained a spe- 

 nen ; I have also examined two specimens in the col- 

 ;tion of Mr. Gubba of Havre, and propose to name it 

 luguiris, Conch. Icon. Supp. pi. 9. sp. 280. 



insceiptus, Eeeve. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 105. f. 3. 

 This is not my C. itiscriptus, nor does it resemble my 

 ;ure of that very characteristic species either in form or 

 marking. I have not seen the shell here represented 

 dch may be, probably, C. Guinaicus. 



inflatus, Sowerby. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 71. f. 3. 

 The figure which M. Kiener gives under this name has 

 resemblance with Mr. Sowerby's, and is apparently 

 T'uiiauHs. I can neither identify Mr. Sowerby's figure nor 

 tain any information of the species. 



Loroisii, Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 65. f. 1. 



I cannot regard this shell, which is very well-known to 



[ to be anything more than a variety of the C.figulinus. 



M\gdelen«, Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 69. f. 4. 



rhis shell I have not had an opportunity of examining, 



; the figure is manifestly one of C.jloecatus. 



Maiiogani, Reeve. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. p. 171. 

 M. Kiener remarks that this species approximates to 

 C. zebra and is also allied to the C. interrupts. Of the 

 ;er I fear it may be a variety, but it has little or no 

 ition with the former. 



Mauritianus, Lamarck, Enc. Me'th. pi. 330. f. 9. 

 Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 69. f. 2. 

 it is extremely probable that this species has been 

 nded upon a variety of C. puncliculatus. 



Mighelsi, Kiener, Icon. coq. viv.pl. 103. f. 1. 

 rhis shell I have not seen, but there cau'be little doubt 

 ts being a richly coloured variety of C. musicus, of which 

 . Cuming possesses specimens. 



Neptunus, Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. p. 133. 



.t is much to be regretted that M. Kiener does not paj 



in occasional visit, in order to make himself acquainted 



with the many species described in this country of which 

 there are no specimens on the continent. In attempting to 

 illustrate the C. Nepttums, an extremely characteristic 

 species, and one of the unique gems of the Cumingian col- 

 lection, M. Kiener has figured, at pi. 92 of his work. a 

 worn C. acuminatus ; with a view to correct this he has 

 figured, at pi. 99, a small specimen of a well-known variety 

 of the C. Amadis ; and in dilating upon its specific cha- 

 racter, he compares it with the C.generalis with which it 

 has no affinity whatever. 

 C. nodiferus, Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 100. f. 4. 



I have not had an opportunity of seeing this shell, hut 

 I doubt if it is anything more than a fine specimen of the 

 C. verrucosus. 



C. Nisus, Chemnitz. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 59. f. 4. 



This is not the O. Nisus but a new species, of which a 

 variety is figured at PI. 107, under the name roseus, already 

 occupied by Lamarck. Chemnitz' C. Nisus appears to he a 

 O. cinereus (var. O. carukscens). The species under con- 

 sideration, of which I have examined M. Kiener's speci- 

 mens, I propose to name C. Kieneri, Conch. Icon. Supp. 

 pi. 9. f. 283. 

 C. nux. Brod. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. 



To this species, M. Kiener remarks, may be referred the 

 C. nanus and maeuliferus as varieties. Respecting the 

 first of these it may be somewhat a matter of opinion, nut 

 the last is a totally different shell, of much lighter growth 

 and of a different design of painting. 

 C. panniculus, Lamarck. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. s; 



M. Kiener gives a very different interpretation of this 

 species from that which we have regarded to be the true 

 one, and of which there is no representation in his mono- 

 graph. The figure under consideration is the true C. abbas 

 and perfectly agrees with the illustration of that species ,„ 

 the preceding plate. 

 C. Parius, Reeve. Kiener, Icon. coq. viv. pi. 60. 



M. Kiener has correctly illustrated this species at pi. mi. 

 The shell figured as a variety of it at pi. 1(13, is a new 

 species of which .Mr. Cuming possesses several specimens : 

 C. collitus, Supp.pl. 8. f. 273. 



C. pastinaca, Lamarck. Kiener, lion. coq. viv. pi. 26. 



This is not the shell which I take to he the C. pastinaca, 

 of which there are two specimens in the British Museum 

 in fine fresh condition, one partiallj covered with a thick 

 fibrous epidermis, 

 Cpusillus, Chemnitz. Kiener. le ii coq. viv. pi. i:; 



The -hell here figured appears to he a dwarf varietv oi 

 the C.catus or interruptus. The species is correctly illus- 

 trated ;i1 |il. 55, I'. 7. M. Kiener has noticed this error. 



