174 PROCEEDIKGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



(these Proceedings, vol. x, p. 221, 1912). That I should have the 

 pleasure of reinstating Gaimardia, even at the loss of Modiolarca, 

 seems a fitting reward for my unwilling, but inevitable, rejection of 

 Quoyia. 



I have just observed that Scudder, in his Nomenclator Zoologicus, 

 pt. i, p. 215, 1882, noted the confusion, but interpreted it in the 

 contrary manner to my explanation, thus: " 3fodiolaria, Gray., Syn. 

 Brit. Mus., p. 82 (Err. typ. pro Modiolarcn) 1842. Moll. Biv." 

 Moreover, as usual, I see that Dr. Dall in his magnificent essay on the 

 Tertiary Mollusca of Florida, published in the Transactions of the 

 Wagner Free Institute of Science, Philadelphia, comments (vol. iii, 

 pt. iv, pp. 804-5, 1898-9) on the spelling in Dieffenbach, which, 

 however, he only knew at second-hand, quoting Hutton's misspelling 

 as Modiolacra. Dall concluded that such a spelling could only be 

 regarded as a typographical error. The facts, however, as now known 

 and here presented, show, I think conclusively, that Gray really 

 invented the name Modiolarca for the Crenelloid molluscs. If we 

 accept the derivation of the name as Modiola and Area, the name is 

 quite applicable to these, whilst it as certainly would scarcely be 

 suggested by the type species of the later-named Modiolarca, as I see 

 little resemblance to either Modiola or Area in this shell. However, 

 it is little use theorizing as to the origin of any Grayian name, as 

 I conclude that the systems upon which J. E. Gray made names are 

 beyond the ken or the imagination of later workers. 



Panda, Albers. 



According to Scudder's Nomenclator, Panda, Albers, is invalid 

 through preoccupation. It is notorious that Albers introduced names 

 quite commonly in use in other branches of zoology, and I could 

 scarcely think such a case as this could have been overlooked. 



Panda was introduced as of Albers by Martens in the second edition 

 of Die Heliceen, 1860, p. 149, the type, by original designation, being 

 Helix falconari, Reeve. Scudder noted a prior Panda, Van Heyden, 

 1826, and upon reference I find Van Heyden lawfully proposed the 

 name in the Isis (Oken), 1826, col. 612. 



In the Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., vol. xxxvii, p. 254, pi. iv, figs. 1-4, 

 1912, Hedley described a most beautiful mollusc as Panda toliitei, 

 making, according to his conclusions, the fourth species of the genus, 

 his revision of twenty years earlier having reduced the recognizable 

 species to three only (Rec. Austr. Mus., vol. ii, p. 29, 1892), viz., 

 falconeri. Gray, atomata, Gray, and larreyi, Brazier. 



No generic synonymy being known to me, I referred to the Man. 

 Conch., ser. ir, vol. xviii, p. 122 et seq., 1900, where Pilsbry used 

 Panda, and gave no synonyms. Reference to the famous vol. ix, p. 163, 

 1894, showed that Pilsbry made use of Panda, but extraordinarily 

 enough he cited the prior usage of the name by Van Heyden, but did 

 not rectify the error. As the invalidity of the name lias thus been on 

 record for exactly twenty years without action being taken, I propose 

 to remedy the defect by renaming the genus 



Hedleyella. 



