PHOLAS. 25 
our author’s own copy of his ‘ Systema.’ Although the printed 
locality was erroneous, for the shell, which was not in the pos- 
session of Linnzus, is anative of America, not of Southern Eu- 
rope, the species was easily determined, and at an early period, 
by the aid of Gualtier, whose figure is sufficiently characteristic. 
Pholas striatus, 
Linneus has not signified his possession of this species: 
there is a chip-box, however, in his cabinet, which contains it, 
but its authenticity is disproved by the writing upon it. The 
indicated locality is erroneous; the mollusk being a wood- 
piercer, and not known to be indigenous to Europe, although 
found there in ship-timber. The engraving of Gualtier was the 
basis for the established identification (P. striatus, Sow. Thesaur. 
Conch. vol. ii. pl. 104, f. 40, 41, 42, and pl. 105, f. 43, 44). 
Pholas candiwus, 
The Pholas candidus of most writers (Wood, Gen. Conch. 
pl. 14, f. 3, 4) still rests in its named receptacle in our author’s 
cabinet. The correct identification of the species appears to 
have arisen chiefly from the cited figure in Lister’s ‘ Cochlearum 
Angliz’; for Bonanni, pt. 2, f. 24,is a Pinna: the reference 
should have been to fig. 836. There is a specimen of P. orien- 
talis in the collection, that has been marked by some one with 
the cyphers 13 (indicative of this species) in the tenth edition, 
but that this is an error is demonstrated by the “ undique striis 
decussatis muricata” of the diagnosis. 
Pholas pusillus. 
As usually occurs, when our author did not himself possess 
the species he had described, no additional information is to be 
obtained from the inspection of his manuscripts. From the 
combined figure and description, neither of which can be termed 
E 
