202 CONTRIBUTIONS 



It has some of the generic characters of the Pyramidella, 

 but the varix and crenulated inner edge would not permit 

 its being placed in that genus. In some characters it resem 

 bles a Cassis, particularly in the lip and emargination, but 

 the genus Cassis is without folds on the columella. On 

 comparing the biplicata with M. Deshayes s figure of 

 Auricula ringens* (Lamarck), I have no hesitation in saying 

 that the two species are very much alike, and belong to 

 the same genus ; but I cannot see the propriety of placing 

 them with the Jluriculce, these being as expressly stated by 

 Lamarck &quot; land shells.&quot;f Another objection may be men 

 tioned, that of their both having a deep emargination at 

 the base. Lamarck says, in his generic description, &quot; basi 

 integerrima.&quot; Our species differs from the ringens, in 

 having a more elevated spire, in having a band on the 

 superior part, and in the number of folds. M. Deshayes s 

 figure presents three distinct folds, while the description 

 says &quot; biplicata.&quot; Lamarck, in his description of this part, 

 says &quot; subtriplicata.&quot; The observations of Lamarck on 

 the ringens, apply to the biplicata, &quot; Petite coquille fort 

 singuliere, qui est tres-voisine par ses rapports de notre 

 tornatelle pietin.&quot; The pietin is now a received genus 

 under the name of Pedipes (Adanson), and it occurred to 

 me before I saw Lamarck s observations, whether it might 

 not be placed there, to which, however, there are ob 

 jections. 



* Coquilles Fossiles, pi. 8, figs. 16 and 17. 



t Ainsi le genre dont il est ici question ne comprend que des coquilles 

 terrestres. An. Sans Vertebres, vol. G. pt. 2, page 137. 



