302 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
species. I do not think it really belongs here, and to my mind 
it rather recalls a very young, slender specimen of &. Frielei. 
Mr. Marshall has recently! published a note by the Marquis of 
Monterosato, who states that the above-mentioned shell does not 
belong to this species. 
10. Evia pernvuta, Monterosato. Pl. XIV, Figs. 2, 10, 12. 
Acicularia pernula, Monterosato: Nat. Sicil., vol. ix (1890), p. 159. 
Hab.—Guernsey, 10 fathoms; Cumbrae, Clyde. 
One of the specimens figured (Fig. 10) was identified by the author 
as being a variety of his species. The small specimen from the Clyde 
(Fig. 2)isimmature. Iam therefore not quite sure of the identification. 
The species has a brilliant red animal, and apart from this character 
may be separated from . intermedia by the more produced form, ete. 
11. Evia Perrrrana, Brusina. 
Eulima Petitiana, Brusina: Journ. de Conchyl., vol. xvi (1869), 
p- 243. 
Hab.—Off the Scilly Is., in 38 fathoms (J. T. Marshall); in 
25 fathoms (KE. R. Sykes). 
It is not, I fancy, a synonym of £. brevis, Req., as suggested by 
various authors. ‘* Menavawr Dock” in Mr. Marshall’s paper? is, of 
course, a misprint for ‘‘ Menavawr Rock.” 
12. Evrima PLATYACME, nom. nov. 
Eulima solida, Jeffreys: Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1884, p. 368, 
pl. xxvii, fig. 4. 
Not Lulima solida, Sowerby: Reeve, Conch. Icon., 1865, Hulima, 
sp. 18. 
Eulima solidula and subangulata, Jeffreys: Ann. & Mag. Nat.. Hist., 
ser. v, vol. vi (1880), p. 317 (mom. sol.). 
Not Lulima solidula, Adams & Reeve: Voy. Samarang, Mollusca, p. 53. 
Not Eulima subangulata, Sowerby: Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1834, p. 8. 
Hab.—W est of Ireland (‘‘ Porcupine” Expedition, 1869,Station 232). 
1 give the names of solidula, Jeff., and subangulata, Jeff., as 
synonyms on the authority of Locard (Exped. Scient. Travailleur et 
Talisman, Moll., vol. i, p. 423). When Jeffreys actually described 
the species, he recorded it, in addition to the Irish locality, from 
various stations off the Portuguese, ete., coasts, and did not specify 
whence his ‘type’ was. The only specimen I can trace in the 
‘“‘ Porcupine”’ collection in the British Museum is labelled ‘ Atlantic” 
only, without any more definite locality. All the other examples of 
this species collected by the ‘‘ Porcupine ’’ which I have seen are from 
‘¢ Portugal, 1,095 f.,” ‘‘ Cadiz, 322 f.,” and ‘“‘ Adventure Bank, 92 f.”’ ; 
and the only authority for the occurrence of this species in British 
seas is the note given by Jeffreys. 
1 «« Additions to British Conchology,’’ pt. vii (May, 1903), p. 58. 
2 Journ. Conch., vol. x, p. 124. 
