320 CLAUSILTID,!;. 



shell ; tlie posterior one is near the suture and extends nearly a 

 whole volution ; the others intervene at nearlj^ regular intervals, 

 between it and the umbilicus ; throat purplish ; lip very broad, 

 flattened, white, tinted with purple. 



" Length 1 inch [= 25-25 mm.], breadth i of an inch 

 [=5 mm.]." {Govld.) 



Hah. Burma : Tavoy {Gould) ; Tethebian, near Moulmain 

 (StoUczl-a) • Tenasserim (Beddome) ; Zwagabin (Theobald); Kargan, 

 near Moulmain (Theobald). 



There is a discrepancy with regard to the number of whorls 

 between Grould's latin diagnosis and his English description, the 

 former stating that there are nine, whereas the latter mentions 

 eight. The figure of the shell, although not very clear, rather 

 favours the former. 



Stoliczka also refers to a slight discrepancy undoubtedly exist- 

 ing between Gould's original figure and description. 



" He states the number of whorls to be 8 or 9, and the apex 

 ' mamillated,' while the figure shews it shortly pointed ; then again 

 he gives ' length 1 inch, breadth I of an inch.' The original 

 figure (whether enlarged or not, it is not stated) represents a 

 shell of 28 mm. in length and 7 in thickness ; the second dimen- 

 sion is, therefore, only one fourth of the total length, instead of 

 one fifth ; if the latter were the case, the shell would be an 

 extremely slender one, and comparing it with goiddianu, as a shell 

 of the same type, I would prefer to consider Gould's figure as 

 more probably correct than his measurement. IS'ow, allowing 

 for these discrepancies in Gould's original statements, I am 

 inclined to think that Pfeiffer's species is very closely allied to, if 

 not exactly identical with, true insignis, but Hanley and Theobald's 

 figures certainly seem to be somewhat different from both the 

 preceding ; however, they do not exclude the possibility of repre- 

 senting mere variations of one and the same species. Whether 

 the form of the aperture in Gould's original figure is slightly 

 exaggerated or not, I think the great expansion of the outer lip 

 is decidedly somewhat abnormal, and setting aside this point the 

 remaining difierences between the shells figured as hisif/nis are 

 not greater than those between the different varieties of lo.vo- 

 stoma or goiddiana." 



In order to try and solve the question raised by Stoliczka, as 

 to the discrepancy between Gould's figure and description, I 

 applied to Dr. John M. Clarke, the Director of the Albany State 

 Museum, but to my regret that gentleman informs me under 

 date of July 1, 1914, that no specimens of Clavsilia insignis can be 

 found in the collection. He states that no such species is listed 

 in the catalogue of the Gould collection prepared by Dr. Gould's 

 daughter, and as this catalogue is an approximately accurate list 

 of the shells delivered when the collection was purchased in 18G7, 

 he thinks that they probably never had the type of that species. 



Olausilia insignis appears to be fairly common, and I have 



