Bibliographical Notices. 81 



Tritons, and have no business with the " Nassidae." We do not 

 quite see the difference between " Sipho " (Islandicus) and "Euthria " 

 (cornea) ; our difficulty has always been to know which was the Lin- 

 nsean species —but now they are distinct genera. Fastiyiella, at most 

 only a form of Cerithium, is placed with TarbineUa (p. 155), and 

 Itinyicula, which is known to be related to Toraatella, is associated 

 with Dolium (p. 197). The authors have rightly hesitated to remove 

 Philippia from Solarium, although unaware of one reason for keep- 

 ing them together, \Az. that in both the apex is inverted and can 

 only be seen by looking into the umbilicus ; this character affords an 

 additional ground for putting them near Pyramidella. 



In the second great division of Univalves {Rostriferd) we find the 

 Cyprceidce placed between Strombus and Aporrhais, instead of fol- 

 lowing Marginella and Erato in the previous order ; although 

 amongst the illusti'ations are figures of Erato Icevis and Cyprcea 

 europcea, both copied from Forbes and Ilanley, who represent and 

 describe them as being essentially alike. 



Planaxis, placed next to the Littorinidce, appears to us more 

 nearly related to Cerithium ; its lingual dentition also, according to 

 the observations of Mr. Charlton of Gloucester, agrees better with 

 that type. 



Fossarus (p. 319) is made to follow Lacuna, its natural ally ; but 

 Narica (" A^anikoro ") is placed much further on, at the end of the 

 "bonnet-limpets " (p. 374). We should like to know how to sepa- 

 rate these shells ; for the distinguishing characters are not given, and 

 many of the species enumerated might with equal propriety be re- 

 ferred to either. The same is the case with Cijclostrema (p. 405), 

 and Adeorbis (p. 407), which appear to be identical. 



Amongst the genera of Pearly Univalves we have been quite be- 

 wildered. All the leading facts and general circumstances are frittered 

 away and lost sight of in the mass of petty details — of merely spe- 

 cific importance — which are here exalted into most prominent notice. 

 Thus we find a "subfamily," of one genus, with no otlier character 

 than operculum ovate (p. 389), while the next " subfamily " has the 

 operculum orbicular. 



Passing on to the key -hole limpets, we find fifty kinds of Fissu- 

 rella (including the British species) referred to Gray's genus Luca- 

 pina, which was certainh'^ not intended for such a rabble. Aud in 

 describing Macroschisma, the authors have forgotten to refer to their 

 usual vade mecum, and ventured the original and very unfortunate 

 remark that the " aperture is much nearer the front margin than in 

 the other genera of the family " ! (p. 447). We thought Chiton ami- 

 culatus had been the type of Cryptochiton, but find it placed in a 

 separate " subfamily." 



In the Nudibranchiate Order, Meliboea and Doto are referred to 

 different families, with " Proctonotidse " between ; and the whole 

 treatment of the group is in contrast with the beautiful monograph 

 of Alder and Hancock. 



The Subclass Heteropoda is a remarkable assemblage, including 

 lanthina, which has a dentition and some other characters in com- 



Ann. ^ Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 2. Vol. xix. 6 



