ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 15 
placed by Linnwus in about the middle of the series, H. lapicida representing 
indeed their carinated condition. Furthermore, Pfeiffer only quotes Edition 
XII, for ‘‘H. Pomatia,’’ while the genus Helix was founded in the Systema 
Nature, Ed. X. 
Other species have been subsequently adopted by authors as the type, 
but the laws of nomenclature seem to require that the first-named, or most 
typical and well-known species of the author, should be considered his generic 
type. 4H. lapicida occurs in Sweden, but none of those adopted by southern 
authors do so. Each of the latter seems to have taken a form used as food 
or medicinally, but less known to Linneus. Until Hanley identified the 
Linnean types of species, two of them were even supposed to have been 
unknown to him! We may therefore give: 
1. HA. lapicida (or H. arbustorum) as type of Linn. , 
2. H. grisea L. (=‘‘aspersa Miill.’’ Hanley) as type of Risso. 
3. H. PematiaL. (Syst. Nat. Ed. XIT) as type of Fitzinger. 
4. H. lucoruml. (=‘‘lactea Mill.”’ Hanley) as type of Swainson. 
Thus it becomes necessary to consider H. lapicida the Linnean type, and 
Arionta arbustorum as subgeneric, though Mérch has placed them in the contrary 
positions. As to H. Hispana there seems to be some doubt, as it was not 
recognized by Hanley among the types, and the description is not full enough. 
Tf, however, it is the H. umbilicaris Brum., it is the type of Campylea Beck, 
which probably includes part of the Californian species, formerly placed by 
me in Lysinoe (Aglaia part, auct.). It,comes nearly between ‘‘H. fidelis ”’ 
and “‘ H. Dupetithouarsi.”” C. setipila Ziegl. is placed next to H. Mormonum 
by Pfeiffer, and retains its bristles permanently, dike var. Hillebrandi. Besides 
the 1-banded or fillet-banded series like ours, there is another in Europe with 
3 or 4 bands, which seems a passage to the § Pentatenie to which Pomatia, 
etc., belong. Compare also ‘‘ H. peliomphalia’’ Pf. and H. Simode Jay, of 
Japan, H. Middendorjii Gerst. Amoor R., H. jaspidea Pf. and H. Patasensis 
Pf., Andes, Peru. Species are included in Campylea that are subangled, 
(e. g. C. Banuatica Partsch, and cingulella Ziegl.) thus approaching lapicida, 
which is said by Mérch sometimes to ‘have four bands like its allies,’’ but 
he may confound two species in this case. One, C. Raspailli Payr. is 
imperforate.* 
*I am indebted to Dr. Newcomb for the use of numerous Conchological books. 
Theshell figured by Chenu (Manuel, I, p. 461) as ‘‘Macrocyclis (Vallonia) pulchella Miill.,” 
is a species of Campylea much like Mispana (umbilicaris) or cornea. The error probably 
arose from the confusion by some authors of Corneola (type pulcheila) with Campylea 
(corned) . 
“ Helix peregrina (Bosc) quoted by Bland & Binney (Pulmonata Geophila, 186), from ‘‘the 
islands on the west coast of America,’ is probably Gmelin’s species of same name, which 
Pfeiffer has shown to be probably the same as the ‘‘H. octona’’ Chemn. (not of Lam.), 
Stenogyra octona of B. & B. p. 282, quoted by Pfeiffer as from West Indies, Guatemala, 
West Columbia, Pacific Is. (Opara, etc.) Chemnitz no doubt mistook it for the Linnean 
H. octona. and Gmelin rectified this by calling it peregrina, which name probably belongs to 
the West Indian shell, not in Mex. or Cal. In Pfeiffer’s synonymy is also Achat. Panamensis 
Muhlf. Mss., not Bulimus Panamensis Brod., but Dr. Newcomb tells me the Panama animal 
differs from the West Indian, and also considers those of the Pacific Islands distinct. 
