OF SOUTHERN INDIA, 119 
specimen, prefers giving it a new name, rather than identifying it with some 
uncertain cast, even when compared in original. A revision of the present species 
of cretaceous, Fusus would be a tremendous work, although undoubtedly most 
important for the development and early study of the SipHonosromara, but it could 
not be carried out without access to the original materials. ; 
I have lately examined the Gosau species (Sitz. Akad. Wien, 1865, LIT, Revis. ete. 
p- 81) and found, that of sixteen species described by Zekeli, only two could be retained, 
of which the Fuses cingulatus, Sow., is most probably not a Lusus, but a Terebra or 
Bullia or an allied genus; and the Fusus Reussi, Zek. may be proved to be a 
Latirus, as may also be expected with the Fusus torosus, which I added (1. ¢. p. 83) 
to the genus. (Voluta torosa, Zek.) We may have then out of sixteen cretaceous Fusus 
not one even of the sub-family Fuszvz! certainly not one true Fusus; but this is 
surely not the case with other described species, at least not to that extent, and there 
are numerous FUsIN# well known, as stated previously. The American species of 
FUSIN2 ave between forty and fifty. 
Forbes did not describe a single Fusus from South India, but numerous mistaken. 
species have been attributed to him by subsequent correctors. I shall notice them 
briefly and append some remarks with regard to the alterations, which have been 
thought necessary. | 
1. Voluta purpuriformis, Forbes—Fusus id. D’Orb.—is Athleta id. (see 
VOLUTINE p. 91). 
2. Rosteilaria cancellata, Forbes, loc. cit. p. 128 
* cancellifera, ibid, Pl. 13, Fig. 18 
D’Orb. could not be traced, but the fragment certainly belongs to an Apporrhais or 
Alaria, never to a Fusus, nor to any species of the Fustva. It may bea fragmentary 
specimen of the upper whorls of Ap. secwrifera, Forbes (vide p. 28, Pl. II, Figs. 
2—3). 
3. Phasianella incerta, Forb. = Fusus subincertus, D’Orb. must provisionally 
remain as a Phasianella, as it is certainly not a Fusus, nor does it appear to belong 
even to that sub-family. 
4, Pyrula cancellata, Sow. (apud Forbes) = Fusus Forbesianus, D’Orb. is 
a Rapa. 
5. Triton atavus, Forb. = Fusus id., D’Orb., must remain as Tritoniune. 
6. Murex fluctuosus, Forbes = Fusus id. D’Orb., must remain as I/urex provi- 
sionally (vide p. 129), until the species can be identified from better preserved 
specimens. 
7. Murex Pondicherriensis, Forb. = Fusus id. D’Orb. is Pollia id. vide p- 127; 
8. Voluta breviplicata, Forb. = Fusus id. D’Orb. is Cancellaria (Euclia) id, 
of CaNCELLARIIDE. 
9. The Pyrula Pondicherriensis, Forb., is identical with Pyrula Carolina, 
D’Orb., and has been described as Ficulopsis Pondicherriensis in the sub-family 
VOLUTINE: vide p. 85. 
= Fusus subcancellatus, 
