238 SPECIES OF THE SYSTEMA. 
We must seek, then, in the remaining references, for a Cymba 
which will accord with the specific diagnosis. Unfortunately 
there are two, if not three, more members of that genus repre- 
sented, C. Neptuni (Adanson and Columna, f. 4), C. proboscidalis 
(Bonanni, f. 2; from hence the locality was copied), and, per- 
chance, the fry of the pseudo C. cymbium, at least the engraving 
of Argenville has been quoted by Lamarck for it. : 
As to Gualtier’s delineation, it combines the shape of olla 
with the four plaits of Neptuni; it is a broken shell, and one 
I hesitate to pronounce upon, though usually ascribed to the 
former. This, and the fry exhibited in Argenville’s work, are 
the sole figures cited in the ‘Museum Ulrice, where the 
“obovata” suits not the shape of either proboscidalis or 
cymbium. There is a fair probability, then, that the Cymba 
Neptuni, which correctly answers to the description in the 
‘Museum,’ and of the three mentioned species comes nearest 
to the ejected delineations, was the V. olla of that work; but 
whether it may be desirable or not to alter the established 
nomenclature I presume not to decide. Assuredly, however, 
the Cymba olla of authors cannot be termed the Voluta olla of 
Linneus. 
The collection, as usual when species are very large, does not 
contain an example of Neptwni, which, judging from Karsten’s 
reference (Mus. Lesk. 1. p. 227) to figure 767 of Martini, was 
regarded by him, at least, as the olla of Linneus. 
BUCCINUM. 
Bucciwunr olearttun, 
By some error the numerals 438, which appertain to olearwum 
in the twelfth edition, have been written upon a young specimen 
of the next species. This was probably a slip of the pen for 
