﻿254 
  PKOCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  MALACOLOGICAL 
  SOCIETY. 
  

  

  recent 
  shell 
  (Tlies. 
  Conch., 
  vol. 
  iii, 
  p. 
  246, 
  pi. 
  254 
  (v), 
  figs. 
  101-3, 
  

   1863) 
  as 
  Bifrontia 
  zanclcBa, 
  Phil., 
  and 
  noted 
  that 
  it 
  differed 
  slightly 
  

   from 
  the 
  fossil 
  as 
  known 
  to 
  him 
  by 
  literature 
  only. 
  Hanley 
  gave 
  no 
  

   measurements, 
  but 
  alongside 
  the 
  figures 
  was 
  placed 
  a 
  line 
  denoting 
  

   natural 
  size. 
  It 
  is 
  easily 
  seen 
  from 
  a 
  criticism 
  of 
  the 
  figures 
  that 
  

   Hanley 
  and 
  Philippi 
  were 
  dealing 
  with 
  different 
  shells. 
  Yet 
  it 
  

   would 
  appear 
  that 
  no 
  one 
  has 
  ever 
  taken 
  the 
  trouble 
  to 
  compare 
  the 
  

   recent 
  and 
  fossil 
  shells. 
  First, 
  Philippi's 
  figures 
  are 
  of 
  a 
  shell 
  which 
  

   does 
  not 
  uncoil, 
  though 
  measuring 
  11 
  ram. 
  Hanley's 
  shell, 
  of 
  which 
  

   the 
  last 
  whorl 
  is 
  uncoiled, 
  measures 
  4 
  mm. 
  only. 
  I 
  have 
  examined 
  

   four 
  fossils 
  which 
  agree 
  Avell 
  with 
  Philippi's 
  description 
  and 
  figure, 
  

   and 
  which 
  I 
  consider 
  to 
  be 
  typical; 
  three 
  of 
  them 
  measured 
  10 
  mm., 
  

   the 
  fourth 
  8*5 
  mm. 
  in 
  diameter. 
  None 
  of 
  them 
  shows 
  any 
  sign 
  of 
  

   uncoiling 
  ; 
  there 
  are 
  two 
  keels 
  close 
  together 
  above 
  the 
  periphery, 
  

   both 
  crenulated; 
  there 
  is 
  a 
  fine 
  sculpture 
  of 
  radial 
  growth-lines 
  and 
  

   concentric 
  threads. 
  I 
  have 
  seen 
  MacAndrew's 
  shells 
  upon 
  which 
  

   Gray's 
  note 
  was 
  written. 
  Probably 
  they 
  served 
  for 
  Hanley's 
  

   description 
  and 
  figures. 
  The 
  type 
  tablet 
  contains 
  four 
  shells, 
  the 
  

   largest 
  under 
  5 
  mm. 
  in 
  diameter, 
  and 
  in 
  all 
  the 
  last 
  whorl 
  is 
  unrolled 
  ; 
  

   above 
  the 
  peripherj^ 
  there 
  is 
  only 
  one 
  crenulated 
  keel, 
  and 
  no 
  

   secondary 
  sculpture. 
  It 
  is 
  necessary 
  that 
  these 
  shells 
  should 
  have 
  

   a 
  name, 
  and 
  therefore 
  for 
  the 
  recent 
  shell 
  described 
  and 
  figured 
  by 
  

   Hanley 
  as 
  Bifrontia 
  zandcea, 
  Philippi, 
  I 
  propose 
  the 
  new 
  specific 
  

   name 
  of 
  Macandreioi, 
  and 
  indicate 
  as 
  types 
  the 
  shells 
  in 
  the 
  British 
  

   Museum 
  dredged 
  by 
  MacAndrew 
  off 
  Madeira. 
  

  

  In 
  the 
  Manuel 
  de 
  Conch., 
  p. 
  714, 
  1885, 
  Fischer 
  proposed 
  Pseudo- 
  

   malaxis 
  as 
  a 
  subgenus 
  of 
  Torinia. 
  He 
  defined 
  it 
  thus: 
  " 
  Coquillc 
  

   discoide, 
  enroulee, 
  planorbiforme, 
  a 
  tours 
  quadrangulaires 
  ; 
  opercule 
  

   convexe, 
  obtusement 
  conique, 
  saillant. 
  Distribution, 
  Mediterranee, 
  

   Madere 
  (P. 
  Zanclcea, 
  Philippi)." 
  I 
  contend 
  this 
  refers 
  to 
  the 
  shell 
  

   I 
  have 
  just 
  named 
  Macandreivi, 
  and 
  that 
  the 
  type 
  of 
  Pseudomalaxis 
  

   must 
  be 
  P. 
  Macandreivi, 
  Iredale. 
  

  

  Fischer 
  (loc. 
  cit., 
  p. 
  715) 
  used 
  Homalaxis 
  for 
  the 
  Eocene 
  fossils, 
  of 
  

   which 
  the 
  opercular 
  characters 
  are 
  unknown. 
  He 
  queried 
  the 
  identity 
  

   of 
  Pseudomalaxis 
  with 
  the 
  prior 
  Ilaira 
  of 
  H. 
  & 
  A. 
  Adams, 
  but 
  the 
  

   latter 
  has 
  no 
  relationship, 
  as 
  I 
  shall 
  presently 
  show. 
  

  

  Verrill 
  described 
  Omalaxis 
  nobilis 
  (Trans. 
  Conn. 
  Acad., 
  vol. 
  vi, 
  

   p. 
  423, 
  pi. 
  xliv, 
  fig. 
  12, 
  1885) 
  from 
  American 
  waters, 
  and 
  

   showed 
  the 
  operculum 
  of 
  the 
  American 
  shell 
  to 
  be 
  Trochoid, 
  not 
  

   'Torinioid'. 
  In 
  the 
  Bull. 
  Mus. 
  Comp. 
  Zool. 
  Harv., 
  vol. 
  xviii, 
  

   p. 
  276, 
  1889, 
  when 
  Dall 
  recorded 
  this 
  species 
  he 
  gave 
  a 
  history 
  of 
  

   the 
  attempts 
  to 
  improve 
  the 
  orthography 
  of 
  the 
  name, 
  and 
  then 
  

   wrote: 
  '^Omalaxis 
  is 
  divided 
  by 
  Dr. 
  Fischer. 
  0. 
  zaticlea, 
  Phil., 
  

   which 
  has 
  a 
  Ton7iia-\ike 
  operculum, 
  is 
  placed 
  under 
  Torinia 
  with 
  the 
  

   name 
  of 
  Pseudomalaxis 
  (possibly 
  identical 
  with 
  Ilaira, 
  H. 
  and 
  A. 
  

   Adams), 
  while 
  the 
  original 
  name 
  is 
  kept 
  for 
  those 
  having 
  a 
  simple 
  

   thin 
  operculum 
  of 
  many 
  whorls." 
  As 
  shown 
  above 
  this 
  last 
  statement 
  

   is 
  inaccurate. 
  

  

  Later, 
  dealing 
  with 
  the 
  Tertiary 
  Mollusca 
  of 
  Florida 
  (Wagner 
  Free 
  

   Inst. 
  Sci., 
  vol. 
  iii, 
  p. 
  331, 
  1892), 
  Dall 
  again 
  approached 
  the 
  matter. 
  

  

  