194 BULLETIN OF THE 



-<3Esopus Stearnsii (Trton) Dall. 



Plate XXIX. Fig. 5. 



Nitidella Jilosa Stearns, Proc. Phil. Acad. Nat. Sci., 1873, p. 345, figure. Not ^sopus 



Jilosus Angas, 1867. 

 ? Columbella pecultaris Guppy, GeoL Mag., 1874, pL xviii. fig. 20 (extra copies, p. 0). 

 Seminella Stearnsii Tryon, Man. Conch., V. p. 179, 1882. 



This species was described from bleached specimens collected by Dr. Stearns 

 at Tampa Bay, Florida.. 



Instead of being white, it is, when fresh, of a handsome warm brown, with 

 an articulated presutural band of white and darker brown. Occasionally there 

 are faint articulations of the color on the spiral riblets of the body whorl. 

 The operculum is like the Japanese one. Beside those collected by Dr. Steams 

 in West Florida, it was obtained by the U. S. Fish Commission at Stations 

 2616, 2617, 2619, and 2622, in 15-17 fms., sand, off the North Carolina coast, 

 and by Dr. Rush, in 12 fms., off Frying Pan Shoals. 



Beside the above mentioned species, another, in which there is no spiral 

 striation, has been collected at Samana Bay, St. Domingo, many years since, 

 by Capt. J. P. Couthouy. This I have identified as Terehra Metcalfei of Eeeve; 

 it is of course not a Terehra at all, but belongs to the subgenus jEso^us of the 

 ColurahellidcB. 



Tn taking leave of this family, I may observe that, though Conidia ovulata 

 has not been taken nearer than the Bahamas, it is highly probable it will 

 eventually be found in South Florida or among the Keys. 



Family MURICIDJE. 



Subfamily MURICIN^. 



In variety of form and variability within the species-limit, probably no group 

 of Gastropods surpasses the present family. Few have suffered more at the 

 hands of the splitter-up of genera; the number of names proposed, in most 

 cases without any reference to the rules of nomenclature or any investigation 

 into the history of the species, is astonishing. I do not know a more discredit- 

 able exhibition of pseudo-science and very real mischief of this kind than that 

 which may be found in the recent treatment of Murex and TyjMs by certain 

 authors, who, it is almost unnecessary to observe, have not been known to 

 contribute anything of value to real biology, to atone for the unnecessary 

 confusion they have created in biological nomenclature. 



Fischer, Tryon, and the majority of those who have treated the modern 

 genus Murex, have reduced the number of subgenera to six or seven, leaving 

 the further subdivision into sections optional. The subgenera of Murex, as in 



