TAYLOR: LIMN7EA PEREGRA VAR OVALIFORMIS. 38 1 



have accentuated the peculiarities he perceived. This view is 

 strengthened by the fact that his description does not agree 

 with his sketches, but conforms well with the figures I give. 

 Mr. Cockerell in his description states shell ' of an oval shape,' 

 which does not well describe the outline of the shell as figured 

 by himself; the last whorl is stated to be 'very convex,' but 

 this term cannot possibly apply to the last whorl of the shell 

 as sketched by him, which especially at the aperture is shown 

 as very much compressed and almost inclined to concavity, 

 approaching in this respect van gibilmannica ; the aperture is 

 said to be oval, with a diameter of a little more than half its 

 length, but in neither of these points does the author's sketches 

 accord with his description, the shape of the mouth as shown 

 in his sketches being of an oblong character, and the length 

 equalling or even slightly exceeding twice the diameter. 



I add here a copy of the original description as published 

 in the "Naturalists' World," Jan., 1886, pp. 18, 19 :— 



. . It is of an oval shape, with the last whorl very convex, and 

 bears a very striking resemblance in general outline to the Indian L. ovalis. 

 It is glossy and semitransparent, with close and well marked striae ; the spire 

 is moderately long and pointed, and the suture is rather shallow. There is 

 a well developed umbilicus. The spire is a little less than half the length 

 of the last whorl. The diameter of the aperture is rather more than half 



its length, its shape is oval Should this variety prove to be new 



it may be called oz/a/z/i; ;;«> 



The foregoing description taken in conjunction with the 

 figures I give, and which should be compared with the figure of 

 van vulgaris on page 298, will enable the student himself to 

 decide whether the van ovaliformis is sufficiently distinct to 

 merit a special and distinctive name. The only differences 

 seem to be that vulgaris is somewhat smaller and slightly less 

 ventricose; the striation and texture in this species are incon- 

 stant and differences in their appearance are often noticed in 

 specimens otherwise quite similar to each other, moreover these 

 characters as set out in the description are quite usual in the 

 species. As no two specimens are exactly alike in every respect 

 we must of necessity allow some reasonable latitude for in- 



