OF CONCHOLOGY. 251 



Moore, of Quakertown, Pennsylvania, who has manifested great 

 interest in conchology, as well as other branches of natural 

 history. 



Note. — Since the publication of the description of C. polita, 

 nob., I have seen an article from the pen of Dr. J. E. Gray, in 

 the Ann. Mag. N. H., 1858, p. 49, in which that gentleman 

 calls attention to certain variations in some species of Cyprcea 

 found in the vicinity of the Sandwich Islands. 



Among others, he mentions C. staphylcea, Linn., as being of a 

 " bright orange yellow, polished, and without any of the usual 

 white tubercles. Some of the specimens have an irregular, white 

 blotch on each side. Some have more or less distinct, small 

 white dots on the back, in place of the tubercles ; one large 

 specimen has these dots very slightly raised, thus approaching 

 the normal state of the species." It is quite probable that Dr. 

 Gray had the 0. polita in his hand when he formed the opinion 

 expressed above. As the differences are so easily seen it is only 

 necessary to refer to a few. In C. staphylcea the teeth extend 

 entirely over the base of the shell on both sides of the aperture, 

 while in G. polita, especially those on the inner lip, are confined 

 to the margin of the aperture, except for a short space from 

 either end, where the teeth extend some distance over the base 

 of the shell. In the adult shell the entire back presents the same 

 appearance as the " white blotch " spoken of by Dr. Gray. As 

 to the tubercles, these seem to be characteristic of a group of 

 species of Cyprcea found in the Sandwich Islands. 



It is difficult to detect the dorsal line on any of the specimens 

 ■ of C. polita examined, while it is quite distinct in the C. sta- 

 phylcea. 



C. polita differs from C. helvola in the margins being less flat- 

 tened. The teeth are more numerous and much smaller, and, 

 lastly, the shell is much less solid. 



Mr. J. H. Thomson, of New Bedford, informs me that Dr. 

 Gould at first considered this species a variety of semiplota, but 

 subsequently expressed the opinion that it was new, and would 

 be described as such at some future day. 



