1880.] 



MSS. Draivings of Indian Land-molluslcs. 



155 



is more intense near the extremity of the foot The mucous gland has the 

 form of a long slit with a very small lobe above." 



Helix (Aetophanta) iaidlatana, Bs., PI. X, Fig. 2. 



Ann. Nat. Hist. Ser. 2, Vol. 18, (1856) p. 253. 



The figure is a copy of fig. 30 of MSS. drawing of a specimen from 

 Manbhum. 



Helix laidlayana, Bs. Hanley, Conch. Ind. PI. Iviii, fig. 3, 4, 5 : 

 figure 4, from Cuttack would appear to be a different species from fig. 3, 

 Orissa, which agrees with the original description, fig. 5. 



H. (Aeiophanta) intumescens, W. T. Blf. PI. X, Fig. 4. 

 J. A. S. B. 1866, p. 33, type from Mahableshwar, "Western Ghats of Hindustan. 



The figure is from fig. 17 of MSS. drawings and bears the following 

 remark " JV. Canarica from Fairbank" [Stoliezka]. 



Mr. Blanford writing of the animal and comparing it with hajadera 

 says — " The animals also shew a difference in colour, that of iiitumescens 

 is uniformly, so far as I have seen, dark cinerous, while that of hajadera 

 is much lighter, but very variable. The latter shell is found mostly on 

 shrubs, the former on the ground, and while iniumescens has as yet only 

 been found at Mahableshwar 4,500 feet above the sea, hajadera (which 

 is rare at Mahableshwar) abounds on the equally or nearly equally high 

 hills of Singhur and Poorundbur, and along the summit of the Western 

 Ghats at about 2000 feet. It abounds at Khandalla at the top of the 

 Bore Ghat." 



Genus HEMIPLECTA, Albers. 

 Die Heliceen, p. 60, (1850). 



Founded on the shell alone ; type htmpfreysiana, Lea, from Singapur. 



" Testa supra granulosa vel decussatim striata ; subtus polita, anfrac- 

 tus ultimus plus niinusve angulatus vel carinatus." 



Albers gives for the distribution of the species of this group the large 

 islands of the Malay Archipelago, Java and the Philippines, New Ireland, 

 <fec. ; only one species Idbiata (= monticola, Hutton) being from India, 

 and that not agreeing with the description, the last whorl being well 

 rounded. The two cliaracters given would embrace a vast number of species 

 having a much wider geographical range, and I should be inclined to restrict 

 it to tiie IMalay region and not to include any of the Indian forms, until 

 otiier characters in common can be found after examination of the 

 animals. 



To Albers' list, Adams added, it is difficult to say why, several other 

 species, among them liyulata, semirugata, and tranqueharica, shells 

 widely differing in their very globose form from the generic description. 

 Semper does not follow Albers, but places many of the species under 



