42 CURRENT LITERATURE. 



those of Englishmen are systematically brought forward by the author of 

 "Molluscs." Figure 20 is an instance of a copied drawing which does not 

 represent what it is intended to show— to wit, the normally-extruded radula 

 of a Tcstacella when feeding (see below p. 50). 



FKiUEE 20. Texlacella luiliolhh'a, Diap protruding (:) its pharynx (ph.) and radula (r) ; oe., 

 oesophagus ; p.c, pulmonary orifice ; sh., shell ; t., tentacles (after Lacazc-Duthiers). 



In conclusion, although all of us cannot consider, with Mr. Brooke in 

 George Eliot's " Middlemarch," whose words are quoted on the back of 

 Mr. Cooke's title-page, that " conchology is a light study" now that empty 

 shells are not its sum total, yet one must allow that many readers will not 

 find this out until they have left far behind, not only the title-page, but very 

 many chapters of this delightful book, the success of which it is a pleasure 

 to contemplate. 



W. M, W. 



Kobelt, W. and H. Rolle. — " Iconographie der land und siiss wasser 

 mollusken." Neue folge. Supplemental vol. i, pi. 32. Wiesbaden, 

 1895. 



Martini and Chemnitz. — " Systematisches Conchylien Cabinet." Fortges. 

 Von W. Kobelt, Lief., 412. Achatinidae, pp. 108-132, pis. 30-35. 



Tryon, G. W., continued by Pilsbry, H. A. — " The Manual of Con- 

 chology," series i, part 60 (contains vol. xv., pp. 181-436, pis. 43-50, 

 59-61) ; series 2, parts 33a and 36 (contain Vol. ix., pp. i-xlviii. and 

 161-366, frontis. and pis. 41-71). Published by the Acad. Nat. Sci., 

 Philad. Feb., 1895. 

 The enormous undertaking in which Mr. Pilsbry is engaged, and for 

 which the support of all naturalists is deservedly sought, may be gleaned 

 from the fact that this quarterly issue contains over 500 pages and 40 plates. 

 In the marine series, part 60 completes the study of the Tectibranchiata, and 

 no student of these forms can complain that they have been neglected of late, 

 when they have been surveyed by Mr. Pilsbry in the present work with 

 especial reference to recent species, while Mons. Cossman has elsewhere 

 reviewed them from a palaeontological standpoint, and Dr. Pelseneer has 

 incidentally reviewed their anatomy. The usual number of generic names is 

 changed as each new monographer appears to bring to light old uses of these 

 terms which have escaped his predecessors. While we doubt if it were worth 

 while to revive the old genus Retiisa, Brown, for the species usually known as 

 Utriculus tnincatiilus, we equally doubt if it be allowable to use Volviila, Adams, 

 there being already, as Mr. Pilsbry admits, two prior genera named Volvulus, 

 and a suitable name having been proposed by Mr. Newton. A similar remark 

 may be made with reference to Cylichna, there being a prior Cylichnus. A. new 

 family Akeridae is created to contain Altera, Haminea, etc. 



With the present parts of the terrestrial series, Mr. Pilsbry completes his 

 great monograph on the Helicidae and Endodontidae. This, the most 

 thorough study the group has ever had, has been worked out not in the shell 

 alone nor in a single anatomical characteristic, but on the only basis which 

 can ever be permanent, the general combination of anatomical and concho- 

 logical characters. The Endodontidae stand as a family by themselves, while 

 the Helicidae are divided into five great groups, characterised by variations 



