356 SPECIES OF THE SYSTEMA. 
would have hesitated to rank it as a mere variety, Linneus 
seems eventually to have held it in suspicion ; for in the manu- 
Script alterations of his own copy, when substituting the more 
modern paging of Lister’s ‘ Historiz Conchylorum,’ for his 
previous method of referring to parts, sections, chapters, &c. 
(the original plates of Lister were not distinguished by any 
numeric succession, and were so irregularly arranged that 
scarcely two copies of his book are exactly alike*), he has, by 
avoiding to write the full equivalent (pl. 577, f. 31, 32) for his 
previous synonym, virtually rejected the erroneous reference, 
by omitting the f. 32. 
Of neither of these two Scarabi can it be affirmed that the 
painting is “ex albo fuscoque variegatus” (Mus. Ulric. p. 663); 
wherefore the later conchologists have regarded the S. umbrium 
as the true representative of Helix scarabeus. The accuracy of 
their decision is confirmed by the circumstance that no. other 
member of Scarabus save that alone (Chemn. Conch. Cab. 
vol. ix. pl. 186, f. 1249, 1250) is present in the cabinet of 
Linneus, who has recorded his possession of an example. 
The younger Linné had added “ Pet. Amb. t. 12, f. 8” (copied 
from Rumphius) to the published synonymy. 
¢ 
Helix lapteta. 
Thanks to the ample details of the ‘Fauna Suecica,’ to the 
undoubted locality, which vastly limits the number of species 
to be compared with the description, and the correct reference 
to Lister’s figure and account of the Carocolla lapicida of 
authors, that shell (Turt. Man. L. and F. W. Shells, pl. 5, f. 51, 
but paler), which is present (as declared) in the Linnean col- 
lection, where it exclusively answers to the definition, has been 
universally recognised for the-veritable species of our author. 
Were further confirmation requisite, it might be found in the 
manuscript of the younger Linné, who has cited, as illustrative 
‘¢List. Conch. t. 69, f. 68” and “* Pet. Gaz. t. 92, f. 11.” "hese 
* The engraved plates of copper are still preserved in the Ashmolean 
Museum of Oxford, which contains likewise a portion of the shell collection of 
that earliest of systematic British conchologists. 
