6 MR. W. H. PEASE ON TWO NEW HELICTERES, ([Jan. 14, 
Vhonneur de la science et des savans anglais, nous sommes trés- 
éloignés de penser que les naturalistes de cette nation aient abjuré les 
principes qui prévaudront toujours chez tous les bons esprits—ceux 
de ne reconnaitre commes coupes méthodiques du systéme que celles 
qui sont fondées sur des caractéres organiques, bien tranchés et de 
méme valeur dans chaque ordre ou chaque famille naturelle. M. 
Swainson, s’il ne craint pas d’établir de mauvais genres, devrait au 
moins craindre que l’on ne accuse, ou d’ignorer ce que les autres 
ont fait, ou de passer leurs travaux sciemment sous silence, en éta- 
blissant des divisions méthodiques et des espéces déja instituées avant 
lui. Son genre Achatinella n’est que la copie, sous un autre nom, 
de notre groupe des Helicteres, établi d’abord dans notre ‘ Prodrome’ 
et ensuite dans ‘Le Voyage de M. de Freycinet.’ Il eut été convenable 
de nous citer et de proposer alors franchement I’établissement de 
genre distincte de notre groupe des Helicteres, en discutant les rai- 
sons qui nous ont porté a le laisser parmi les Helices, notamment 
Videntité de leurs animaux.” 
This genus, so clearly established and justly contended for by 
Férussac, passed out of sight. The only authors, so far as we are 
aware, who have adopted it are Drs. Gray, Beck, and Herrmannsen. 
M. Deshayes has refused to acknowledge it, as well as Partula and 
other genera now universally adopted; but that should not lessen 
M. Férussac’s claim, more particularly as the reason he alleges (a 
want of a knowledge of the animal) has been set aside by Eydoux 
and Souleyet in the ‘ Voyage de Bonite.’ The name is classical and 
appropriate (‘a drawn-out or extended coil’’), and does not of ne- 
cessity connect the genus with the family of Helices. 
The next monograph following that by Férussacis from Dr. Pfeiffer 
in the ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1845, in 
which the Doctor not only adopts the generic name of Swainson, but 
also his specific names for those species which are synonymous with 
the earlier species described by Férussac. In subsequent monographs, 
however, by the same author, in his great work ‘ Monographia 
Heliceorum Viventium,’ priority is assigned to the specific names 
given by Férussac. 
In 1850 Mr. Reeve published a monograph in his ‘ Conchologia 
Tconica,’ under the name Achatinella. All future describers follow 
Dr. Pfeiffer and Mr. Reeve’s example. A full monograph and his- 
tory of the species would require several years’ laborious study and 
research. The most perfect list of synonyms that has appeared, more 
particularly of the earlier-described species, is that by Dr. Newcomb 
in the ‘ Annals of the New York Lyceum,’ 1858. 
The number described is about 325, of which (according to Dr. 
Newcomb) more than three-eighths are synonyms. We follow the 
rule laid down by Mr. Swainson, and adopt the name Helicter 
for this genus, bemg convinced that it is classical and has priority, 
and proceed to add two species as follows :— 
HELICTER PROXIMUS. 
H. testa sinistrorsa, imperforata, oblongo-ovata, ventricosa ; 
