244 LiND AND FEESnWATER 



Machociilamys vesicula, Hutton. (Plate CXXI. figs. 1, la.) 



Locality. Mussoorie, N.W. Himalaya {Godwin- Austen)^ ex 

 collection H. F. Blanford. 



Shell narrowly perforate, globosely depressed, Aery thin, dull 

 surface; sculpture none, quite smooth; colour very pale horny, 

 nearly Avbite ; spire moderately high, depressedly pyramidal, apex 

 acuminate ; suture impressed ; \Aiiorls 6, rather rapidly increasing, 

 the last expanding, well rounded at the periphery ; aperture sub- 

 oblique, roundly lunate, as high as broad ; peristome very thin ; 

 columellar margin nearly vertical, curved. 



Size: maj. diain. 12-5 ; min. 11-25; alt. axis .5 mm. 



In ' Fauna British India ' (Mollusca), 1908, p. 80, I say:—" It is 

 possible vesicula of 1838 was M. (jJaxica : only the collec-tion of a 

 good series of shells of this type from the Simla and Mussoorie 

 Hills at different elevations can settle this point." Again at p. l40 

 I say : — " It is impossible now to ascertain on what shell Mr. Benson 

 based his first description of this species ; he behoved it had 

 a wide geographical range. Unfortunately, the exact locality 

 of the shell Dr. Blanford has described is not specified, nor is it 

 now to be found among his shells. The Miirree specimens are 

 distinct. 



"The H. vesicula of Hutton, 1837, was certainly Himalayan ; he 

 speaks of it as occurring from Monee Marjora, on edge of the 

 plains, to Simla and the forest of Maliasu, 10,000 feet. He and 

 Benson gave it an even greater range, as Dr. Blanford explains, 

 p. 80. Thus it was that in 1852, fifteen years later, we find him 

 giving an amended description of a shell he found at Soti Durga, 

 at head of the Gangetic Delta, under the name H. vesicula. The 

 typical specimens are in the McAndrew Collection at Cambridge, 

 and now before me, marked Himalaya ; but it is not the original 

 label, these were all destroyed, and fresh substituted by McAndrew. 

 These shells are unmistakably from Lower Bengal, and I can see 

 nothing to distinguish them from M. sulijecta of Rajmahal. 



"The two species from between Keemuch and Mhow, recorded 

 by Captain Hutton as Nos. 28 & 29, J. A. S. B. 1834, pp. 520-21, 

 and of which he gives descriptions of the animals (sufficiently good 

 to distinguish them when some one finds them again), cannot 

 possibly be the same as the Himalayan H. vesicula. Hutton, who 

 was a very accurate observer, noticed the difference between 

 them : he says * they have no tentacular processes on the right 

 side, no fleshy hook on the tail.' No. 3 Helix of a previous 

 paper in same Journal, February 1834, p. 83, was a Macrocldavnjs., 

 and is now known as M. petrosa : ' shell is like No. 29, but is 

 more polished.' " 



Maceochlamys sacrata, n. sp. (Plate CXXVIII. fig. 3 ; 

 Plate CXXIX. fig. 4.) 



Locality. Parasnath {N. Annandcde). 



Shell, fine perforation nearly hidden, depressedly globose, thin, 

 shiny ; sculpture quite smooth on the last whorl, on the apical 



