356 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



MOLLUSCA. 



The Method of feeding in Testacella. — Owing to the fact that the 

 proofs of my paper in ' The Zoologist' for August, when received by me, 

 were paged, I was unable to give to two fellow-countrymen the credit due to 

 their observations on Testacella. Thomas Blair (Mag. Nat. Hist. vol. vi. 

 1833, p. 43) found by experiment that the worm was usually seized by the 

 end, but records a case where one was caught by the middle, observing at 

 the same time that the difficulties he saw in the w 7 ay of its being swallowed 

 were not overcome in this instance. Some further remarks are made by a 

 writer signing himself "J. D." (query, John Dovaston), and again, in the 

 following year, the latter writer, in describing the habits of some of the 

 slugs sent to him by Mr. Blair (Mag. Nat. Hist. vol. vii. 1834, p. 224), 

 mentions that a specimen protruded a white organ against his hand when 

 holding it. I ought also to take this opportunity of calling attention to a 

 paper by Mr. W. E. Collinge, dealing with the generative system in the 

 genus Testacella (Annals & Mag. Nat. Hist. vol. xii. July, 1893, p. 21), 

 which bears out my remarks on the specific distinctness of T. scutellum. — 

 Wilfred Mark Webb (Holmesdale, Brentwood). 



NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS, 



Far-hearing Animals in Nature and Commerce. By Henry 

 Poland, F.Z.S. 8vo, pp. i — lxv; 1 — 392. London: 

 Gurney and Jackson. 



London is the great market for furs and skins of the world, 

 and not St. Petersburg or Nijni-Novgorod, or any of the great 

 cities of Northern or Western Europe or Canada, as many 

 imagine ; and to our metropolis come the fur-merchants of every 

 part of Europe, Asia, and America. 



Mr. Poland, as a leading London furrier, may be assumed to 

 have the statistics of the trade at his fingers' ends, and, so far as 

 concerns an enumeration of the various species of animals whose 

 skins have a commercial value, the numbers annually imported, 

 and their comparative prices, he may be deemed to write 

 authoritatively ; but when, in addition to these statistics, he 

 attempts to give some information on the natural history of these 

 animals, he very soon gets out of his depth, and shows that an 

 author may be a " Fellow of the Zoological Society ' f and yet 

 know very little about Zoology. It is clear, from his remarks, 





