gttde: pleotopylis leiopiiis and p. pseudophis. 89 



which I received some time ago from Mr. Cairns, this same fold appears 

 again as two coalesced folds, the posterior portion being below the 

 anterior, and it possesses in addition an elongated denticle between the 

 latter and the upper long fold, sharing this feature with an immature 

 shell I received from Miss Linter. 



In some specimens the free horizontal fold close to the lower suture 

 and below the vertical lamina soon becomes attenuated, and runs 

 parallel with the suture joining the parietal ridge at the aperture, but 

 in other shells this fold terminates a little in front of the vertical fold. 

 The palatal armature is identical in all the specimens. It appears, 

 therefore, that no constant character differentiates P. leiopiiis and 

 P. pi&udophis, and the two must therefore be united under one name. 

 The former having been published by Benson in 1860,^ Avhile the 

 latter was described 14 years later, P. fseuclophu becomes a synonym, 

 and the shell will therefore have to be known as P. leiopiiis. 



I would take this opportunity of pointing out that two names have 

 likewise been applied to another species, i.e., P. jugatoria, Ancey, 

 and P. laminifera, Mollendorff. M. Geret, of Paris, who purchased 

 the collection of the late M. Ancey, was obliging enough to allow 

 me to inspect the type of P. jugatoria, and upon careful comparison 

 I found that this shell was identical with Mollendorff's P. laminifera. 

 The latter name having been published in the Nachrichtsblatt der 

 Deutsch. Malak. Ges. for November and December, 1885, while 

 Ancey's species was described in Bull. Soc. Malac. France, vol. ii, 

 No. 1, p. 127, dated July, 1885, the former name becomes a synonj^ra, 

 and the species will have to be known as P. jugatoria. To put the 

 question of priority beyond doubt, I endeavoured to find out the actual 

 elate of publication of the French journal, and owing to Mr. Smith's 

 usual kindness, I was able to see that the copy of it at the British 

 Museum had been received there on October 20th, 1885. 



1 Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. in, vol. v (1860), p. 246. 



