Nomenclature of European Helices. By Ai 
Heélicelle, Hélicine, Maillot, &c.,—but defines none of them, 
and gives no Latin names. Blainville, in his ‘Manuel’ of 
1825, also mentions f/élicelle, Lam., for Helix obvoluta, but 
he too fails to Latinize the French vernacular name. This 
leaves the way clear for Risso’s restriction of Helicella, Fér., 
in 1826. 
However, the real point is that we do not know the date 
of Férussac’s ‘ Prodrome’ with certainty, while I have shown 
that Gray in 1821 proposed the name Jacosta for a species of 
the genus *. It may well prove that in this case my decision 
will require revision or reversal; but if so, the name in 
common use, Xerophila, can in no case be used for the group, 
as it dates from 1837. 
Hygromia, Fruticicola, Trichia. 
Dr. von Millendorff agrees with me that Hygromia should 
stand for the genus commonly known under one or other of 
the above names; but he prefers Férussac’s form Hygro- 
manes. As I have elsewhere held, this was intended for a 
noun in the plural and is not acceptable, besides being a 
heterogeneous section never yet restricted. I therefore adhere 
to Risso’s name [ygromia. 
Regarding the use of the subgeneric term Trichia, I would 
say that Trichia, de Haan, bears the date of 1841, not 1850, 
as von Méllendorff seeks to prove t+. ‘This leaves the priority 
with Trichia, Hartmann, 1840. But it seems to me that 
Fruticicola of Held, 1857, should have preference on account 
of its earlier date. Von Mollendorff states that the first 
species of Fruéicicola was fruticum, Miill., “ Krste Art ist 
Jruticum, Mill., so dass eigentlich Fruticicola fiir Eulota 
einzutreten hatte’’; but had the original article by Held in 
the ‘ Isis’ been consulted, it would have been seen that fruti- 
cum is not the first but the seventeenth species in Held’s list. 
As H. fruticum was eliminated from the group by Hartmann 
three years later, the misgivings expressed by von Mollen- 
dorff lest I should unsettle the name Hu/ota are groundless. © 
One of the very few cases where I could not consult an 
original work, and quoted at second-hand, was in the use of 
Schliiter’s name Perjoratella. I procured the original work 
a year or two ago, and find that Westerlund, whom I 
* Of, Man. Conch. ix. p. 258, and Proc. Acad, Nat. Sci. Philad. 1897, 
p. 359, under H. chionobasis. 
+ The Crustacea of the ‘ Fauna Japonica’ appeared in parts, the first 
issued in 1833, the last in 1850. Trichia was in “decas quinta 1841” 
(p. 109). The dates are printed at the foot of the first page of each 
fascicle. 
