MOLLUSCA 397 
(3) Helcena rotelloidea Mighels. 
Helicina rotelloidea Mighels, P. Boston Soc. 1. (1845), p. 19; Pfeiffer, Conch.- 
Cab. Helicina, p. 23, pl. 11. fig. 4o—3. 
Flelicina bronniana Philippi, Zeitsch. Malak. rv. (1847), p. 124. 
Has. Oahu (Mighels, &c.). 
(4) Helicina sandwichiensis Souleyet. 
Helicina sandwichiensis Souleyet, Voy. Bonite, Zool. 1m. (1852), p. 529, pl. xxx. 
figs. 1—5. 
nec ? Hl. sandwichtensts Sowerby, Thes. Conch. m1. pl. ccLxx. figs. 173—4. 
A variety “8” has been recorded by Pfeiffer as from the Loyalty Islands ; 
probably this is an error. See Crosse, J. Conchyl. xu. p. 405. 
Has. Oahu, Waianae Mts. (Baldwin); at and below Kaala (Perkins). 
(5) Helcina uberta Gould. 
Helicina uberta Gould, P. Boston Soc. 11. (1847), p. 202; U.S. Explor. Exped. 
Moll. pl. vit. fig. 114. 
Has. Maui and Oahu (Gould).—Oahu, below Kaala (Perkins). 
SPECIES DOUBTFUL OR ERRONEOUSLY RECORDED. 
Helicina antoni Pfeiffer. Originally recorded without locality; subsequently Pfeiffer 
gave the Hawaiian Islands and the Gambiers. It really appears to come from 
Honduras, and the Hawaiian habitat is probably erroneous, these supposed Hawatian 
specimens belonging, as undoubtedly the Gambier Island shells do, to 7. azz Crosse 
(eConchyl! xan. p) 227, pl. vi. tig. 8). 
FHelicina crassilabris, Philippi. It has been suggested by Pfeiffer that this is 
Hawaiian, but it really comes from Venezuela or the Caribbean Region. 
Helicina fulgora Gould, originally described from Manua, Samoa Islands; it has 
also been noted, but, I think, erroneously, from the Hawaiian Islands. 
FHtelicina pisum Philippi. 1 think ‘Sandwich Is.” must have been a mistake and 
possibly refers to Vate or Sandwich I.: it may be a slip for Savage I., from which 
specimens, inseparable from this, undoubtedly do come. This appears not to be the 
HT, pisum Hombr. and Jacq., which equals (7. ¢ahztenszs Pease. 
