THE NAUTILUS. 141 
It may be as well to say at once, that for satisfactory work in 
this genus it is desirable to have at least a dozen mature examples 
of each species. Working with few examples, there is danger of 
taking varietal characters for specific ones, if the species is little 
known. Once the true specific characters have been ascertained 
from a good series, any single example, if mature, can be deter- 
mined ; but it is quite otherwise when the form is new, or belongs to 
a species which has been described from only one or two examples. 
From necessity, species in this genus have, in the past, usually 
been described from one or two specimens. The descriptions, if pre- 
pared with reasonable care, even without anatomical details, will, I 
believe, be easily recognizable hereafter. But at present we do not 
know, in very many cases, which of the characters mentioned in the 
descriptions are really specific, and consequently whether the as- 
sumed species are valid. 
I do not wish to suggest that species of Veronicella ought not to 
be described without numerous examples. If naturalists were to 
wait in every case until the material was as abundant as they could 
desire, our knowledge of tropical species of many groups would 
hardly advance atall. When astudent introduces a presumed new 
species of Veronicella, having carefully ascertained that it differs 
from all previously described forms, and in his description sets forth 
that difference, he undoubtedly does good service. We are not to 
be prevented from interesting ourselves in the forms of Veronicella 
because we do not always know whether we are dealing with spe- 
cies, races, or varieties. But we should like to know the real status 
of each form, and must consequently urge those who have the 
chance to collect material to do their best to obtain sufficient. 
The first Central American Veronicella to be named was J. olt- 
vacea Stearns, 1871. It was found in Nicaragua and has been 
supposed to inhabit California also. Although it is practically cer- 
tain that it is not a native of California, it has been described in 
works on North American mollusea on the supposition that it be- 
longed to that fauna. I have seen a specimen from Nicaragua, and 
have given a few descriptive notes in Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Nov., 
1890, p. 389. Mr. W. G. Binney has published a figure of this 
same specimen. 
The next species was made known in the year following, 1872. 
This was V. moreleti Crosse and Fischer, from Mexico; fulvous 
with two blackish bands, whereas olivacea has no dark bands. 
