MOLLUSCA OF INDIA. 83 
state of confusion ; and it is to clear this up partially that I have 
endeavoured to classify them, and distinguish what were the species 
Hutton, Benson, and others have described and named. 
Few of these Indian naturalists had the training and skill to 
examine the anatomy of the animal; only in a few instances do we 
find the outward form and colour noticed ; the old plan of boiling 
and getting rid of the animal as soon as possible was followed, and 
many species were collected in a dead and bleached state, and were 
thus described. 
T now regret extremely that when I was in India I also was in 
perfect ignorance of how to dissect a mollusk ; and it was only after 
association with Henry and William Blanford and Ferd. Stoliczka 
that my attention was directed to the outward form of the animal, 
and I recorded this and made many useful sketches from the living 
animals, Ferd. Stoliczka was one of the first to take up the internal 
anatomy of the land Mollusca of India; and he published several 
very interesting and valuable papers in the ‘ Journal of the Asiatic 
Society of Bengal, which I have already referred to. 
On commencing with this genus I had to consider what characters 
I could take or combine to separate on good grounds the very nume- 
rous species we have in the Kast. As the form of mantle is so 
widely different, and as this organ, however slightly modified, affects 
the sculpture of the shell, I began to examine under the microscope, 
and, using a moderately high power, first the sculpture of as many 
species as I could get access to. In my own collection I have a vast 
amount of material, all with the exact localities most carefully re- 
corded, and which I knew had never got mixed together. Each 
box or tube was taken in turn, and every shell separately examined 
and its sculpture recorded in a tabular form. I soon found that the 
same species from the same locality were all identical with one 
another and had a certain defined range, while in many instances 
the structure and arrangement of the epidermal lines of growth were 
sufficiently marked to distinguish the species even from a small 
chip. I give drawings of the most characteristic surfaces, magnified 
and drawn under the camera lucida. This is of course nothing new 
in the study of shells, for by far the greater number of species can be 
distinguished by better and more marked characters, and such labour 
would be thrown away. I only wish to explain here the method I 
followed before discrimination was made between the different local 
forms that came before me. I am under great obligation to Mr. 
Sylvanus Hanley for a similar examination of his fine collection, to 
Dr. A. Giinther, of the British Museum, and Prof. J. W. Clarke, of 
Cambridge (where Benson’s collection now rests), and to Mr. G. 
Nevill for specimens from the Indian Museum, Calcutta. Mr. V. 
Ball also gave me a large number he had collected at different 
times. 
Starting with the sculpture of the shell only as a distinctive cha- 
racter, I first divided these shells into a number of artificial groups, 
again subdivided roughly by size and form. JI only anticipated from 
the first a remote relationship to be shown; but it aided greatly in 
PART III. I 
