of Great Britain. 107 



9. Obvoluta, Mull. 



No other locality appears to have been observed for this, since its 

 discovery in Hampshire by Dr Lindsay. 



10. Glabella, Drap. 



H. rufescensj Mont. 



11. Depilata, Pf. 



H. circinata^ Fer. 

 This species is not uncommon on the banks of the sea near Up- 

 per Clapton, Middlesex, where I observed it in 1833. The speci- 

 mens there collected agree perfectly with those of PfeifFer in Ferus- 

 sac's cabinet. It is not hispid in any stage of growth, but in other 

 respects is scarcely to be distinguished from the following. 



12. Concinna, Jeff. 



This may be a variety of H. hispida, as now supposed by Mr Jef- 

 freys, but is stronger and with the hairs more deciduous than the 

 usual form of that species. It is very generally diffused, common- 

 ly taking the place of H. glabella in situations where the latter is 

 not found. 



13. Hispida, Mull. 



14. Sericea, Mull. 



It is difficult to say whether or not this is the H. sericea of Mul- 

 ler. Having introduced it as such on the faith of the Baron de 

 Ferussac, I leave it for further investigation. 



15. Granulata, Aid. 

 H. hispida, Mont. 



It is needless to repeat here the observations given on this and 

 the foregoing species in another place. The present is surely dis- 

 tinct. 



16. Fusca, Mont. 



17. Excavata, Aid. 



18. Lucida, Drap. 



There can be no doubt of this being the H. nitida of Muller, but 

 the name has been so often misapplied, that I feel great reluctance 

 to use it. Lucida, though not altogether free from the same fault, 

 is less liable to be misunderstood. 



19. Radiatula, Aid. 



var. H. vitrina, Fer. Tab. des Moll. 



20. Nitidula, Drap. 



var. H. Helmii, Gilbertson, MS. 

 Mr Gilbertson points out some peculiarities in the habits of the 

 animal, together with the white colour of the shell, as a reason for 

 considering his H. Helmii to be distinct from H. nitidula. Mr G. 

 would do well to publish his observations upon it. 



