EUOMPHALUS. 
255 
Localities. — Of the upper face or exterior of the shell there are two specimens y 
in Mr. Vicary's Collection from Wolborough ; another in the British Museum from 
Wolborough ; and three others in the Torquay Museum, which seem to have come 
from Lummaton. 
Of the umbilicus there is a fine specimen in my collection, and two in the 
British Museum, one of which, in the Lee Collection, was figured by Phillips as a 
specimen of his Uuomphalus serpens. These three specimens are all from 
either Lummaton or Barton. 
Remarks. — In the above enumeration are given two series of shells, one of 
which shows the spire and the other the umbilicus. Generally speaking, these 
specimens do not give any indications that the two series belong to the same 
shell, but one of the Torquay Museum specimens of the first series shows 
enough of the umbilicus to prove that there is every reason to suppose that it is 
identical with those which are visible in the second series of fossils. Therefore, 
although I originally treated them as distinct in the ' Greological Magazine,' I now 
feel obliged to group them together. It only remains to remember that similarity 
of the umbilicus, though it suggests, may not prove, identity, as two distinct 
fossils might have an exactly similar umbilicus, and therefore that further 
evidence may show that after all the two species are distinct. 
Having regard first to the group of specimens that show the spire, we observe 
that they belong to a very beautiful and distinct species. Mr. Roberts and myself 
compared it with all the species of Euomphaliis mentioned in d'Archiac and de 
Verneuil's list, and found it quite unlike any of them, and there is nothing like 
it in any of the later writers whom I have been able to consult. 
Its upper surface somewhat resembles the original figure of Euomplialus 
germanus, Phill, sp.,^ and as such one of the specimens in Mr. Vicary's Collection \( 
was labelled by Salter. From that shell, however, it distinctly difiers in the 
arrangement of the ornament and the shape of its section. 
The specimen in the British Museum is there labelled Pleurotomaria euom- 
phalus, Sandberger,^ but to that species the present shell clearly does not belong. 
Though very similar in general shape, the central furrow is much broader and 
is not marked as a sinus-band, so that it evidently is not even of the same genus 
of shell. 
For these specimens I proposed the name of Euomphalus fenestralis in the 
' Geological Magazine,' 1889. 
Turning to the group of specimens showing only the umbilicus, we find that 
with regard to them the question of nomenclature is much more difficult. 
Mr. Lee's specimen, now in the British Museum, is the original of one of 
1 1841, Phillips, 'Pal. Foss.,' p. 118, pi. xlviii, fig. 226. 
2 1852, Sandberger, ' Verst. Ehein. Nassau,' p. 187, pi. xxii, figs. 12, \2a. 
