328 On the Nomenclature of European Helices. 
followed, was wrong; and the re-arrangement tabulated by 
von Mollendorff (p. 171) is to be substituted for mine. 
Helicodonta, Gonostoma. 
Any attempt to overthrow Helicodonta in favour of Gono- 
stuma will be seen to be futile when it is really understood 
that (1) Helicodonta of Férussac, proposed for Helices with 
toothed or sinuous mouths, was restricted by Risso, in 1826, 
to the single species obvoluta; and (2) Gonostoma, Held, 
1837, is preoccupied by (Gonostoma, Rafinesque, 1810, a 
name in common and accepted use by ichthyologists (see 
Giinther, ‘ The Study of Fishes,’ p. 629, 1880). There isa 
genus //elicodon in the ‘Tankerville Catalogue, p. 35 (1825), 
which includes species of Polygyra, Sagda, Anostoma, Cepolis, 
and Pleurodonte. 
Campyliea, [Helicigona. 
It is admitted that my use of Helicigona for the Campylea 
group of Europe is justified, but von Mollendorff contends 
that Mérch deserves the credit for such use. This may be 
true: Mérch was a good and great conchologist in his day 
and generation, and | am only sorry that he did not convince 
every body that they should adopt Helicigona. It is claimed 
that I erred in putting the carinated H. lapicéda in a section 
by itself, whereas it should be included with the unkeeled 
H. cornea. This is a matter of opinion, upon which no one 
could wish to dogmatize; but one would not suppose that a 
writer who considers Plectotropis a distinct genus from 
Agista on account of the keel (there are no anatomical 
diflerences) would criticize the course I have taken. 
In conclusion, von Méllendorff suggests that, in pursuance 
of his rule no. 3, the genus might be called ‘‘ Campylea 
(Beck) v. Iher.” ‘This course would oppose the rule of 
priority, and is further open to objection from the fact that 
v. Ihering included the American Hpiphragmophora species 
in Campylaa, although I have shown that they are widely 
different anatomically. 
Section Otala, Schumacher, 1817. 
After some discussion of the limits of this group and of 
my use of the term Otala, Dr. von Méllendorff has cast 
doubt upon what I expressly and, I think, advisedly stated to 
be the facts in the case. 1 said (‘ Manual,’ p. 323): “ The 
name Otala was proposed for three species, placed in two 
sections. Section a contained hamastoma (which being the 
