﻿lEEDALE 
  : 
  MOLLUSCAN 
  NAME-CB 
  ANGESt 
  325 
  

  

  noted 
  and 
  some 
  are 
  in 
  use. 
  I 
  note 
  a 
  couple 
  of 
  omissions 
  which 
  

   necessitate 
  changes. 
  Thus 
  on 
  p. 
  3 
  Schaufuss 
  proposed 
  Gelagna 
  for 
  

   Lagena, 
  Klein, 
  as 
  a 
  sub-genus 
  of 
  Tritonium, 
  Lm. 
  On 
  pp. 
  28 
  and 
  29 
  

   the 
  species 
  referred 
  to 
  this 
  group 
  are 
  chemnitzii, 
  Gray, 
  cingxilatum, 
  

   Lm., 
  and 
  clandestiniim, 
  Ch. 
  The 
  last-named 
  has 
  been 
  regarded 
  as 
  the 
  

   Kleinian 
  species, 
  so 
  I 
  designate 
  it 
  as 
  type 
  of 
  Gelagna. 
  Unfortunately 
  

   this 
  discovery 
  will 
  necessitate 
  the 
  rejection 
  of 
  Paralagena, 
  Dall, 
  

   proposed 
  (Smithson 
  Miscell. 
  Coll., 
  vol. 
  xlvii, 
  1904) 
  for 
  the 
  same 
  

   group. 
  Although 
  clandestifmm, 
  Dillwyn, 
  1817, 
  ex 
  Chemnitz, 
  has 
  

   been 
  used 
  for 
  the 
  species 
  name, 
  I 
  note 
  that 
  Hedley 
  preferred 
  

   succinctum, 
  Linn., 
  and 
  followed 
  Dall 
  in 
  placing 
  the 
  species 
  in 
  Argo- 
  

   buccinum. 
  I 
  might 
  point 
  out 
  that 
  claiidestinum 
  had 
  been 
  used 
  by 
  

   Lamarck 
  in 
  1816, 
  and 
  that 
  there 
  is 
  apparently 
  also 
  a 
  Boltetiian 
  name 
  

   available. 
  I 
  will 
  treat 
  these 
  items 
  later. 
  

  

  Paetulida, 
  Schaufuss, 
  vice 
  Spiralinella, 
  Chaster. 
  

  

  On 
  p. 
  6 
  of 
  the 
  Paetel 
  Catalogue, 
  Schaufuss 
  proposed 
  the 
  above 
  name 
  

   for 
  " 
  Farthenia, 
  Adams, 
  not 
  Lowe", 
  the 
  latter 
  being 
  also 
  utilized. 
  

   In 
  the 
  Gen. 
  Ptec. 
  Moll., 
  vol. 
  i, 
  1853, 
  p. 
  233, 
  H. 
  & 
  A. 
  Adams 
  used 
  

   Parthenia 
  (as 
  of 
  Lowe), 
  giving 
  as 
  members 
  deciissata., 
  ^Vowt., 
  excavata, 
  

   Phil., 
  interstincta, 
  Mont., 
  and 
  spiralis, 
  Mont. 
  These 
  writers 
  always 
  

   gave 
  their 
  species 
  in 
  alphabetical 
  order, 
  so 
  that 
  the 
  first 
  species 
  might 
  

   not 
  even 
  be 
  typical. 
  We 
  know, 
  however, 
  that 
  they 
  made 
  use, 
  to 
  

   a 
  great 
  extent, 
  of 
  J. 
  E. 
  Gray's 
  systematic 
  work, 
  and 
  in 
  the 
  Proc. 
  

   Zool. 
  Soc, 
  Lond., 
  1847, 
  p. 
  159, 
  Gray 
  gave 
  as 
  type 
  of 
  "■ 
  Parthenia, 
  

   Lowe, 
  Turbo 
  spiralis, 
  Mont." 
  This 
  was 
  not 
  one 
  of 
  Lowe's 
  species, 
  as 
  

   Schaufuss 
  recognized, 
  so 
  that 
  I 
  here 
  designate 
  as 
  type 
  of 
  Partulida, 
  

   Schaufuss, 
  the 
  species 
  Turbo 
  spiralis, 
  Mont. 
  This 
  course 
  will 
  

   necessitate 
  the 
  acceptance 
  of 
  Schaufuss's 
  name 
  in 
  place 
  of 
  Spira- 
  

   linella, 
  introduced 
  bj' 
  Chaster 
  for 
  this 
  species, 
  and 
  accepted 
  with 
  

   generic 
  rank 
  in 
  the 
  British 
  List. 
  

  

  Campanile, 
  Fischer, 
  and 
  Campanilopa, 
  gen. 
  nov. 
  

  

  The 
  former 
  name 
  was 
  introduced 
  by 
  Fischer 
  in 
  the 
  " 
  Manuel 
  de 
  

   Conch.", 
  p. 
  680, 
  June 
  30, 
  1884, 
  as 
  of 
  Hayle, 
  with 
  a 
  diagnosis, 
  "S.g. 
  

   Campanile, 
  Bayle, 
  1884. 
  Coquille 
  tres 
  grande, 
  etc. 
  . 
  . 
  . 
  Opercule 
  

   typique 
  (C 
  Iceve, 
  Quoy 
  et 
  Gaimard, 
  Australia). 
  . 
  . 
  . 
  Les 
  especes 
  

   fossiles 
  de 
  ce 
  groupe 
  sont 
  nombreuses 
  dans 
  VYiOcene 
  (^C. 
  giganteum, 
  

   Lamarck) 
  . 
  . 
  ." 
  

  

  The 
  description 
  of 
  the 
  operculum 
  and 
  the 
  direct 
  nomination 
  of 
  

   C. 
  leeve, 
  Q. 
  & 
  G., 
  indicates 
  that 
  species 
  as 
  the 
  type. 
  If 
  the 
  fossils 
  

   differ 
  they 
  must 
  bear 
  another 
  name. 
  Cossmann 
  later 
  named 
  

   giganteum 
  as 
  type, 
  and 
  this 
  was 
  accepted 
  by 
  Bullen 
  Kewton, 
  but 
  the 
  

   latter 
  agrees 
  with 
  me 
  that 
  the 
  living 
  shell 
  has 
  the 
  best 
  claim 
  on 
  

   the 
  name. 
  As 
  a 
  matter 
  of 
  fact 
  C. 
  giganteum, 
  Lamarck, 
  cannot 
  be 
  

   regarded 
  as 
  congeneric, 
  because 
  it 
  is 
  much 
  more 
  like 
  Terebralia 
  

   in 
  every 
  essential 
  shell-character. 
  As 
  the 
  living 
  shells 
  cover 
  different 
  

   animals 
  it 
  seems 
  inaccurate 
  to 
  associate 
  the 
  fossils 
  with 
  them, 
  except 
  

   in 
  direct 
  lineage, 
  and 
  certainly 
  C. 
  giganteum 
  cannot 
  be 
  classed 
  in 
  the 
  

  

  