32 ADDITIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO THE SLUG LIST. 



Mr. Cockerell's scheme in the P. Z. S., 1891, p. 215, Jandlidcc was 

 freed from the Succhieidcc and ampHfied by the inclusion of the 

 Hyalimaciticc. These radical changes seemed improvements to my 

 critic, for he incorporated them in his Check List. 



It is rightly stated by Prof Cockerell that H. ?/taillardi occnx?, in 

 Bourbon ; in error I had quoted it from the Mauritius. The date, 

 author, and locality of /. verrucosa and niarmorata were transcribed 

 exactly from a separate copy of the paper which the author, Dr. Simroth, 

 had himself presented to me. Though the niceties of authorship and 

 publication are ])erhaps more correctly distinguished by Mr. Cockerell, 

 yet since the Auckland Islands are politically, geographically, and 

 biologically as much a part of New Zealand as the Isle of Wight is a 

 part of Great Britain, I must still adhere to my " mistake " of reckoning 

 these slugs among Novozelanian animals. 



Species 305 and 328 should be indicated as fossil by square 

 brackets, both date from 1880. In the present edition dates are 

 promiscuously applied or omitted ; should a second edition appear its 

 value would be augmented by the dating of all names. Such dates 

 benefit the reader by showing priority at a glance and also aid a search 

 for description. 



ADDITIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO THE 

 SLUG LIST. 



No. III. 



Since the List was published a number of corrections and additions 

 have occurred, which are given below. 



"The three following species are to be added to the List, having 

 been unintentionally omitted: — Limax nafalianus, Mikhaehs, 1892 

 Lytopelta franscaspia, Rosen., 1892; Ly. boetfgeri, Rosen., 1892." — 

 T. I). A. C. in litt. 



Page 168 — For "museum" read "museums." Page 168 — For 



"varietal character" read "varietal characters." 

 Page 170 — '■'■Limax: .syns. Gestroa, Pini, 1876. Chroinolimax, 

 Pini, 1876. Opilolimax, Pini, 1876. (The authority and 

 date were omitted in the List." — T. D. A. C. in lift.) 

 Page 170 — L. fasciatus, Raz. " L. and P. consider, apparently 

 with good reason, iha.t fasciatus, Raz., is a variety of ater; 

 while fasciatus, Moq. (though Moquin-Tandon considered it 

 to be the same as fasciatus, Raz.) is a var. of niaximus, and 

 a different thing. I would therefore make the following 

 change : — 



