OF SOUTHERN INDIA. 283 
XXXVII. Family, HULIMIDZ. 
H. and A, Adams, Genera I, Huzrurp#, p. 235, and SryLirerips, p. 238; PYRAMIDELLIDZ, 
ex parte, Gray, Guide 1857, p. 57; 2d. auctorum, 
The animals of the typical species of this family resemble in many respects 
those of the Rrssoms. They have a linguiform foot, which is more or less produced 
in front and posteriorly provided with an operculigerous lobe; being generally 
well developed, but often unequal on the two sides; the tentacles are subulate, 
usually not very long, somewhat thickened at the base where the eyes are 
sessile; the mantle is enclosed, occasionally with a very slight anterior fold; the 
teeth are generally wanting or rudimentary, in which point, only, they agree with 
the PrramipeLiip# and CErrruiopsip#, so far as our present observations go. 
The operculum is generally horny and sub-spiral, and of the same shape as 
the aperture. 
The shells are turreted with a solid or excavated columella ; the surface very 
often smooth; aperture ovate, rounded, sub-effuse and somewhat produced in front, 
posteriorly narrow and angulated ; inner lip thin, without folds or teeth. As 
compared with the Rissorp~z, the shells of the present family may be said in general 
to differ, by their more elongated spire and the larger number of whorls, which are 
generally not richly ornamented, but rather smooth and polished. 
Taking in consideration the more important characters of the shells, and so far 
as known also those of the animals, we would propose to distinguish in this family 
three sub-divisions, namely, cweunirziiv#, EULIMINe and sTYLirerIv%. We shall 
enumerate some of the better known genera according to this division. 
In a geological point of view, the study of the Huzrurp# is very important. 
What Forbes said of the Prraurperzips, namely that they belong more to past 
ages than to the present epoch, applies equally well to this family. 
a. Sub-family,—CHEMNITZIIN AZ. 
This sub-division includes the larger number of the extinct genera. The recent 
species belonging to it are as yeu very defectively known, being mostly shells of very 
small size. 
1. <Achs, Lovén, 1846 (H. and A. Adams’ Gen. I, p. 234, ex parte; Ann. 
Mae. Nat. Hist., 1860, VI, p. 118) as restricted for the spirally ribbed species only. 
2. bala, Leach, 1847 (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 1860, VI, p. 119) proposed for 
the smooth species of Aclis. 
3. Dunkeria, Carp. (ibidem) has been proposed for the cancellated species of 
Turbonilla, of which it was first intended to be a sub-genus, but A. Adams is of 
opinion that its nearest ally is Aclis. 
4, Hyala, H. and A. Adams, 1853, (Gen., I, p. 326,) rather a thin, smooth 
shell, but the animal agrees very closely with that of Aclis. It is doubtful as yet, 
whether the genus would not be better placed in the sub-family zacuninz. 
