202 CONTRIBUTIONS 
It has some of the generic characters of the Pyramidella, 
but the varix and crenulated inner edge would not permit 
its being placed in that genus. In some characters it resem- 
bles a Cassis, particularly in the lip and emargination, but 
the genus Cassis is without folds on the columella. On 
comparing the biplicata with M. Deshayes’s figure of 
Auricula ringens* (Lamarck), I have no hesitation in saying 
that the two species are very much alike, and belong to 
the same genus ; but I cannot see the propriety of placing 
them with the Auricule, these being as expressly stated by 
Lamarck “land shells.”+ Another objection may be men- 
tioned, that of their both having a deep emargination at 
the base. Lamarck says, in his generic description, ‘‘ basi 
integerrima.” Our species differs from the ringens, in 
having a more elevated spire, in having a band on the 
superior part, and in the number of folds. M. Deshayes’s 
figure presents three distinct folds, while the description 
says “biplicata.” Lamarck, in his description of this part, 
says “subtriplicata.” The observations of Lamarck on 
the ringens, apply to the biplicata, “ Petite coquille fort 
singuliére, qui est trés-voisine par ses rapports de notre 
tornatelle piétin.” The pietin is now a received genus 
under the name of Pedipes (Adanson), and it occurred to 
me before I saw Lamarck’s observations, whether it might 
not be placed there, to which, however, there are ob- 
jections. 
* Coquilles Fossiles, pl. 8, figs. 16 and 17. 
t Ainsi le genre dont il est ici question ne comprend que des coquilles 
terrestres. An. Sans Vertébres, vol. 6, pt. 2, page 137. 
