n THE NAUTILUS. 



libnirie? and an extensive collection of shells, and their whole aim in 

 life seems to be making new genera. In some one of the older groups 

 a few species are found, having a certain peculiar pattern of sculp- 

 ture or coloring, or some little singularity in the fold of the col- 

 umella or hinge teeth, and presto, a genus is formed and the science 

 is burdened with another name! 



These genus-makers never stop to see whether this slight jjeculiarity 

 does not imperceptibly shade out into other species which are n'^t 

 as marked ; this is no business of theirs ; the main point seems to be 

 the attaining of a sort of cheap reputation for scientific knowledge. 



According to Tryon's Structural and Systematic Conchology, there 

 were, at the time of its publication in round numbers, about 6,000 of 

 these so-called genera, besides a great many synonyms, a number 

 which has been largely increased since that date. Even the old 

 genus Helix, without Nanina and Zonites, has some 200 of these 

 names, many of which have never been characterized. Xo doubt 

 our increasing knowledge and the good of the science has demanded 

 that some of these older genera should be divided. In days gone by 

 the name Pyrula embraced a large proportion of the marine univalve 

 shells, having a short spii'e and lengthened canal, while Fusus in- 

 cluded about all with a similar canal and elevated spire. So Buc- 

 cinum was a miscellaneous group, characterized principally by a 

 notch at the base of the aperture. As now generally recognized, 

 Pyrula includes only pear-shaped shells of thinpajnraceous structure, 

 Fusus a sort of spindle-shaped species, and Buccinum a small, well- 

 defined, perfectly natural grouj). 



I am aware that those who favor this dismemberment of the older 

 genera claim that many of tliese groups are too large for studying 

 advantageously, and tluit the variation from the type of a genus is 

 verv gradual through long series of species, to forujs wdiich are so 

 difiierent from the type that no descri|)tion will cover the whole, and 

 the very ambiguous description of Helix is quoted as an example of 

 this. Mr. Binney, in the Manual of American Land Shells, says : 

 " In common with all who have studied the Pfeifferian genus Helix^ 

 I have long been convinced of the necessity of recognizing among its 

 species numerous distinct genera. ^ ^i^ * Before recognizing these 

 groups as distinct genera, I desire to wait until we can ascertain 

 whether generic characters can be found in the jaws and lingual 

 dentition, as well as in the shells. Convinced that chai-aeters cannot 

 be found in these organs, or in the genitalia, I ado])tcd, in that work, 



