On the Australian Haliotidce. 49 



that we attribute the apparent deficiency of these shells 

 where Chitons have been found in abundance. 



Confining our remarks now to the Australian Ear-shells, 

 ■we may commence with 



Haliotis rubra * 



of Dr. Leach, whose name should supersede all others, since 

 he was the first who described it as a new species. Why it 

 is here called Noevota does not appear, for there is no author 

 quoted for this name ; and if it is one of the author's, it is 

 quite superfluous. 



This is the most common species of the Australian and 

 Tasmanian coasts, and we have found it in both colonies. 



It is very doubtful whether the variegated specimens 

 are mere varieties. In a series now before us of twenty-three 

 adult shells, and in many other stages of growth, there are only 

 two that possess these markings, and they have other indica- 

 tions of being a distinct species. New Zealand is given as 

 one of its habitats, but this we believe to be altogether a 

 mistake, never having seen or heard of the species in those 

 islands. 



The next in point of size is a species described by me 

 nearly twenty-five years ago in the catalogue of the Bligh 

 collection, and reprinted in the second edition of Exotic 

 Conchology, as 



Haliotis glabra, 



here very inaccurately figured at PI. 10, fig. 30, under the 

 new name of H. albicans, of M.M. Quoy and Gaimard, 



* Not ruber, as quoted by Mr. Eeeve, who cites Dr. Leach for this name, 

 but without stating where the Doctor's description is to be found. I have 

 not the book to refer to, but the conchologist will find this shell figured and 

 described in Dr. Leach's Zoological Miscellany, 3rd vol., 8vo., published 

 about 1820. 



