34 LIEUT.-COL. H. H. GODWIN-AUSTEN ON [Jan. 6, 



The central tooth is much shorter and smaller than the laterals, and 

 is tricuspid (fig. 3 V), the two outer cusps being just below the centre 

 point ; in one specimen dissected, owing to the central part being much 

 worn, this central tooth is evenly tricuspid (fig. 3). The laterals rise 

 from long narrow plates, and are very pointed, with an outer and inner 

 cusp some distance below the apex, being thus also tricuspid ; the 

 outermost laterals are very nearly unicuspid (fig. 3 a). The jaw is 

 curved, but has no central projection (fig. 4). 



This shell vras placed by von Martens in the genus MacrocJilamys ; 

 and looking at its shiny glassy shell, so very like many in the Indian 

 region, I should certainly have done the same ; yet the animal 

 differs from that genus not in one but in several characters — exter- 

 nally in the absence of the long shell-lobes ; internally in the odon- 

 tophore and jaw ; and in the reproductive organs it is vridely 

 separable, MacrocJilamys not possessing the spicula amoris. In 

 searching through Semper' s work for characters approaching those 

 now figured and described, I observe the nearest, as might be 

 expected, in those genera found in the islands of the Malay Archi- 

 pelago and not in those found to the westward in India. On plate iii. 

 figs. 1, 2, Reise im Archipel d. Philipp., is shown the sagitta amatoria 

 of Tennentia philippinensis and Parmarion pvpillaris, from Java, of 

 the same type. This I would submit is an indication that the slug- 

 like forms of this part of the world are the descendants of these 

 glassy Helices, just as we find the general anatomy of Girasia, a 

 slug-like species of India, to be like that o( Macrochlamys, and that 

 although the outward form of both animal and shell is very similar 

 respectively, the races of the two areas have a most remote relation- 

 ship. How far these characters of Everettia and Dyakia extend 

 around this area is yet to be discovered. We cannot as j'et say 

 with certainty that shells with similar internal structure do not exist 

 in India ; they are certainly absent in the N.E. Himalayas and Khasi 

 Hill Ranges, but there are numbers of even large species in Southern 

 India yet to be examined, and of which we know as yet nothing. 

 Of the shells of New Guinea we are also quite ignorant, at least I 

 have not seen any work on their anatomical variations. 



Everettia consul. 



Helioc resplendens (Philippi), Metcalfe, P. Z. S. 185 1, p. 70(?). 



Helix consul, Pfeiff. P. Z. S. 1854, p. 289; id. Monogr. Helic. 

 iv. p. 44 (1859), et v. p. 97 (1868) ; id. Novitat. Conch, iii. 

 pi. Ixxiv. figs. 13, 14 ; Reeve, Conch. Icon. pi. cxcviii. fig. 1395 

 (1854). 



Macrochlamys consul, "Wall. P. Z. S. 186*5, p. 405. 



Nanina consul, v. Martens, Preuss. Exp. Ost-x\sien, Landschneck. 

 p. 240 (1867). 



Everettia JucuNDA. (Plate III. fig. 1.) 



Helix jucunda, Pfeiff. P. Z. S. 1863, p. 524 ; id. Novitat. Conch, 

 iii. pi. Ixxiv. figs. 11, 12 ; id. Monogr. Helic. v. p. 101 (1868). 



