28 



ON THE SPECIFIC NAME OF HELICELLA 

 ERICETORUM, MUELLER. 



By EDGAR A. SMITH, F Z.S. 



Under the above title, in the last number of this Journal, Mr, A. 

 Santer Kennard has offered some observations respecting the 

 identity of the species referred to, with the Helix itala of Linnaeus, 

 and has called in question the accuracy of Mr. Hanley's decision 

 in this matter. 



Having known Mr. Hanley (who, I believe, is still living) 

 for many years, and the extreme care which he was accustomed 

 to bestow upon all his work, I felt sure that he could not have 

 committed the mistake imputed to him by Mr. Kennard, namely, 

 of misreading the number written upon the specimen of Helix 

 itala in the Linnean cabinet. Mr. Hanley says that " the signifi- 

 cant numerals " are " distinctly inscribed upon one of the speci- 

 mens," but he does not quote the figures. His statement, 

 however, is perfectly correct, for the number upon the shell, 598 

 (not 593, as given by Mr. Kennard) corresponds with that of the 

 species in the loth edition of the " Systema Naturae," tom. i., 

 p. 772. Moreover, if Mr. Kennard had read the introduction to 

 Mr. Hanley's work," he would have discovered (p. 3) " that 

 these numerals more frequently corresponded to the series of the 

 tenth than of the twelfth edition." Mr. Kennard's mistake is 

 obvious. He referred to the twelfth instead of the tenth edition 

 of the Systema, the species in question being numbered 683 

 in the former. 



Besides the gratification of testifying to my old friend's 

 accuracy, I fully recognise the desirability of refuting Mr. 

 Kennard's statement, which, uncontradicted, might tend to 

 depreciate the great importance and utility of Mr. Hanley's 

 work. 



I am very much indebted to Mr. Smith for pointing out the very natural 

 error into which I had fallen, but in my own defence I must say that the 

 figures are very indistinct ; consequently, it was easy to mistake 8 for 3, 

 especially as I did not know what the figures should be. I did not refer to 

 either the loth or 12th edition. The Linnean number as given by Mr. Hanley 

 for Helix itala was 6S3, and as this did not agree with the numerals on the 

 shell, I concluded that an error had been made. — A. S. Kennard. 



* Ipsa Linnaei Conchylia. 



