﻿242 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OK 
  TIIE 
  MALACOLOGICAL 
  SOCIEXr. 
  

  

  a 
  and 
  c) 
  ; 
  but 
  when 
  an 
  author 
  cites 
  a 
  single 
  example 
  of 
  a 
  x;reviously 
  

   established 
  genus, 
  even 
  if 
  he 
  restricts 
  that 
  genus 
  by 
  the 
  abstraction 
  of 
  

   some 
  of 
  its 
  members 
  to 
  form 
  a 
  new 
  genus, 
  liis 
  example 
  is 
  not 
  strictly 
  

   the 
  designation 
  of 
  a 
  type. 
  

  

  This 
  interpretation 
  of 
  liule 
  30 
  will 
  make 
  it 
  necessary 
  to 
  revise 
  the 
  

   history 
  of 
  certain 
  names, 
  especially 
  some 
  of 
  those 
  in 
  Lamarck's 
  list 
  

   of 
  1799, 
  in 
  order 
  to 
  ascertain 
  whether 
  his 
  examples 
  can 
  be 
  accepted 
  as 
  

   types. 
  In 
  many 
  cases 
  it 
  may 
  be 
  possible 
  and 
  desirable 
  simply 
  to 
  

   confirm 
  his 
  selection 
  and 
  to 
  secure 
  the 
  continuance 
  of 
  existing 
  

   nomenclature 
  by 
  definitely 
  designating 
  his 
  examples 
  as 
  types. 
  In 
  

   some 
  cases, 
  however, 
  this 
  course 
  may 
  not 
  be 
  desirable, 
  but 
  such 
  cases 
  

   should 
  be 
  very 
  carefully 
  considered 
  before 
  any 
  change 
  is 
  made, 
  for 
  

   another 
  clause 
  of 
  Rule 
  30 
  makes 
  such 
  a 
  change, 
  once 
  effected, 
  

   unalterable. 
  

  

  Again, 
  the 
  rule 
  of 
  establishing 
  tlie 
  names 
  which 
  were 
  properly 
  used 
  

   and 
  published 
  by 
  the 
  earliest 
  author 
  after 
  1758 
  has 
  not 
  yet 
  been 
  fully 
  

   complied 
  with, 
  especially 
  in 
  regard 
  to 
  some 
  of 
  liolten's 
  and 
  Da 
  Costa's 
  

   names. 
  With 
  regard 
  to 
  the 
  use 
  of 
  Eolten's 
  names 
  (Museum 
  

   Boltenianum, 
  1798), 
  I 
  agree 
  with 
  Dr. 
  Dall 
  that 
  if 
  Morch's 
  names 
  are 
  

   accepted 
  those 
  of 
  Bolten 
  cannot 
  be 
  disallowed 
  ; 
  the 
  two 
  catalogues 
  

   stand 
  on 
  precisely 
  the 
  same 
  footing, 
  for 
  both 
  give 
  examples 
  of 
  well- 
  

   known 
  species 
  as 
  examples 
  of 
  their 
  groups. 
  

  

  With 
  respect 
  to 
  Da 
  Costa, 
  one 
  of 
  his 
  names 
  [Glycimeris) 
  has 
  been 
  

   generally 
  adopted 
  with 
  his 
  application 
  of 
  it, 
  but 
  there 
  are 
  two 
  others 
  

   which 
  must 
  be 
  recognized, 
  for 
  his 
  British 
  Cojichology 
  was 
  published 
  in 
  

   1778, 
  a 
  date 
  which 
  gives 
  it 
  priority 
  over 
  both 
  Bolten 
  and 
  Lamarck. 
  

  

  The 
  names 
  that 
  will 
  be 
  dealt 
  with 
  in 
  the 
  following 
  pages 
  are 
  Venus, 
  

   Paphia, 
  Gafrariuvi, 
  Cytherea, 
  Pectuncidus, 
  and 
  Cuneus. 
  

  

  Venus. 
  

  

  The 
  history 
  of 
  this 
  name 
  and 
  its 
  applications 
  is 
  a 
  curious 
  one, 
  for 
  

   the 
  large 
  group 
  of 
  shells 
  to 
  which 
  Liunseus 
  gave 
  the 
  name 
  included 
  

   practically 
  the 
  whole 
  family 
  Veneridse 
  with 
  several 
  other 
  genera 
  

   which 
  have 
  since 
  been 
  relegated 
  to 
  other 
  families. 
  

  

  The 
  first 
  author 
  to 
  divide 
  the 
  Linnsean 
  genus 
  was 
  Bolten, 
  who 
  

   distinguished 
  four 
  groups 
  of 
  species 
  under 
  the 
  names 
  of 
  Paphia, 
  

   Gafrarium, 
  Cytherea, 
  and 
  Venus, 
  mentioning 
  certain 
  of 
  each, 
  but 
  not 
  

   designating 
  types. 
  Bolten's 
  groups 
  are 
  heterogeneous 
  assemblages, 
  

   for 
  he 
  seems 
  to 
  have 
  classified 
  them 
  by 
  external 
  characters 
  only, 
  such 
  

   as 
  shape 
  and 
  sculpture 
  ; 
  but 
  they 
  have 
  to 
  be 
  recognized, 
  and 
  Dr. 
  Dall 
  

   has 
  already 
  selected 
  types 
  for 
  Paphia, 
  Gafrarium, 
  and 
  Cytherea,^ 
  all 
  

   of 
  which 
  will 
  be 
  discussed 
  in 
  the 
  sequel. 
  

  

  Bolten's 
  Venus 
  still 
  remained 
  a 
  large 
  and 
  varied 
  assemblage, 
  but 
  of 
  

   course 
  it 
  does 
  not 
  follow 
  that 
  the 
  type 
  of 
  Venus 
  must 
  be 
  one 
  of 
  the 
  

   species 
  mentioned 
  under 
  this 
  head 
  by 
  Bolten 
  ; 
  it 
  may 
  or 
  might 
  have 
  

   been 
  chosen 
  from 
  the 
  original 
  assemblage 
  of 
  Linnseus, 
  if 
  that 
  included 
  

   other 
  species 
  which 
  did 
  not 
  belong 
  to 
  Bolten's 
  other 
  groups, 
  when 
  

   determined 
  by 
  properly 
  selected 
  types. 
  

  

  ■^ 
  Trans. 
  Wagner 
  Free 
  Inst. 
  Sc, 
  vol. 
  iii, 
  pt. 
  iv, 
  1902. 
  

  

  