138 Prof. W. B. Benham on 



utiginosus." Nevertheless it is evident that it is an Acantho- 

 drilus, but impossible to say whether it belongs to any species 

 more recently and more carefully described ; it seems best in 

 such a case to leave the matter alone, and to regard it as a 

 distinct species. 



(2) " L. campeslris." — There are three bottles so labelled, 

 which I will indicate by the letters a, b, c. 



(a) Contains two individuals collected in Dunedin ; they are 

 well-preserved mature worms, which are at once recognizable 

 as belonging to that curious Acanthodrilid which Beddard * 

 termed Neodrilus, a genus which he now refuses to recognize 

 as distinct from Acanthodrilus^. It seems to me that the 

 characters of N monocystis are every bit as distinctive and 

 important as those upon which he founds the genus Octo- 

 chcetus. At any rate, Hutton's worm is characterized by the 

 single spermiducal gland, the single spermatheca, and other 

 features, a detailed account of which was published by me in 

 1892 J. The worm is common around Dunedin, and, as a 

 matter of fact, the very first earthworm I picked up in the 

 bush round the town was N. monocystis, from which Hutton's 

 type does not differ. 



As will be seen below, it is impossible to retain Hutton's 

 specific name, since he has confused under it two distinct 

 worms. 



(b) Labelled " Water of Leith," contained a single indi- 

 vidual and a portion of a worm, which are also Neodrilus. 



(c) Labelled " Wellington," contains three individuals, all 

 of which agree one with another in external characters, viz. 

 the prostomium reaches to the first intersegmental groove, 

 and is traversed by an indistinct transverse furrow ; the 

 clitellum covers the segments 27 to 32, while the twenty-sixth 

 exhibits some glandular modifications ; the tubercula puber- 

 tates are on the segments 28 to 31 ; the first dorsal pore is 

 between the segments 6/7. With the exception of the last 

 feature, and in the fact that the worms are slightly smaller 

 than usual (viz. 1^ to 2 inches), these specimens agree with 

 the descriptions of Lumbricus rubellus. 



A reference to Hutton's description shows that he had both 

 Neodrilus and Lumbricus before him, as he says " Colour 



* Beddard, " Observations on the Structural Characters of certain new 

 or little-known Earthworms," Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 1887, vol. xiv. 

 p. 157. 



f ' Monograph of the Order Oligochseta,' 1895. 



% Benham, " Notes on Two Acanthodriloid Earthworms from New 

 Zealand," Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci. vol. xxiii. p. 289. 



