MUREX. 279 
as a synonym of auriculifera, it seems hardly expedient to 
remove its very expressive name from the latter. 
Neither the manuscripts nor the collection of Linnzus 
throw any further light upon the matter; he did not himself, 
indeed, possess an example, but described the species from one 
or more specimens in the ‘ Royal Museum.’ 
MUREX. 
Sluvex Haustelliuw. 
A marked example (Murex haustellum, Sowerby, Genera 
Shells, Mur. f. 1) of this species, in the Linnean collection, 
confirms the established opinion, which is further corroborated 
by a manuscript reference to “ List. 903.” The synonymy is 
correct, yet Argenville’s figure was unworthy of being quoted ; 
it was termed “becasse” in the explanatory text, an epithet 
equivalent to, yet not actually, “haustellum,” as. cited in 
the ‘Systema’: the name was more directly derived from 
Rumphius. 
Siurex tribulus. 
Under this’ name our author included, not alone in the 
‘Museum Ulric,’ but likewise in both editions of the ‘ Sys- 
tema,’ both the Murex tenuispina of Lamarck (Reeve’s Conch. 
Icon. Mur. f. 85) and his M. ternispina (as figured by Sowerby, 
Conch. Ill. £110, and by Reeve). The latter species I cannot 
distinguish in the ‘ Animaux sans Vertébres’ from crassispina, 
and must trust therefore to the accuracy of the two writers just 
mentioned. In the ‘ Conchologia Iconica,’ where both are defined, 
the crassispina may be easily distinguished from being devoid 
