76 THE NAUTILUS. 
American Slugs,” which is, in all respects, a most valuable and 
timely production. 
As might be supposed, the authors find it necessary to criticise 
their predecessors in the study—just as, no doubt, their successors 
will criticise them. But whatever criticism may be offered, it will 
always be recognized that they put our slugs on a sounder basis than 
before, supposing that they finish the work so well begun. 
Nevertheless, if they are not careful, they are liable to be trou- 
bled by the the shades of the departed; and they have, in fact, 
woke out of his malacological grave the present writer, who has a 
few posthumous observations to make herewith. 
Ariolimax californicus. 
In Nov., 1889, Mr. H. F. Wickham sent me two examples of this 
species, which he found at Los Gatos, California. I have before me 
the drawings I then made of their internal anatomy, which agree 
with those of Messrs. Pilsbry and Vanatta, except that the epiphal- 
lus is less swollen and the retractor penis is not so broad. The epi- 
phallus is clearly shown running to the end of the so-called “ flagel- 
lum ” of the penis; so that this point in the anatomy, which our 
authors seem to think they were the first to observe, was known to 
me long ago. Of course they could not be supposed to know any- 
thing about an unpublished observation, but had they carefully 
examined the literature, they would have read Simroth’s statement : 
“ Herr Cockerell fand, nach brieflicher Mittheilung, dass ein echtes 
Flagellum nicht vorhanden ist, sondern dass das vas deferens sich 
bis su dessen blinden Ende verfolgen lisst.’” (Malak. BL, N. F., 
XI, p. 114). They might also have observed fig. H, pl. V, of W. 
G. Binney’s 3d Suppt., which, though rather rough, is practically 
correct. Binney himself says the vas deferens “enters the penis at 
the end of the flagellum below the bulb,” (Man. Amer. Land Shells, 
p. 100), which cannot be considered far wrong. Simroth’s figure in 
Mal. Bl. is, however, unquestionably wrong as to this matter, sup- 
posing that he had real californicus before him. 
Our authors assume that californicus f. maculatus is really colum- 
bianus, on the wholly insufficient grounds that they have never seen 
spotted californicus. Yet they may be correct, as I never had a 
spotted californicus I could dissect. My notes on the British Mu- 
seum specimens are as follows :— 
“Ariolimax californicus, from W.G. Binney. Big spot on mantle. 
45 mm. long. 
