1872.] 
207 
Postscript to the Monograph of Himalayan and Barmese 
CiAHSiHiE, — by Dr. F. Stoliczka. 
(Received 31st July, 1872.) 
(See plate IX.) 
In looking through the proof-sheets of Mr. Blanford’s paper, while they 
passed through the press, and comparing his descriptions with the specimens 
of Indian and Barmese Glamilim in my collection, I find that a few additions 
can be made to the Monograph. The new species are figured on the same 
plate, IX. I would have gladly handed over the additional materials to 
Mr. Blanford, hut as he is now engaged on an expedition in Persia, and may 
not for some time return to Calcutta, I do not think it advisable to defer 
on that account the publication of these notes. 
I have only to observe that I had an opportunity of comparing some of 
Mr. Theobald’s original specimens, and have thus been enabled to add some 
information regarding the synonymy of one or two doubtful species. 
1. Cl. cylindrica. (Ad p. 199.) 
I have specimens of this species from near Tezpiir (Asam), and Dr. 
Waagen very recently brought one from near Mairi ; the gco_,iap ica 
tribution of the species may, therefore, he said to extend ovei the w o e o 
the southern slopes of the Himalayas, though its head-quarter appears to be 
about Nyni-tal, or near the centre of the range. 
3. Cl. bacillum. (Ad p. 200.) 
This species varies considerably both in the form an eng i o e s it 
The specimen figured may be taken as the type, but others longer and s eafarer 
are quite as common, they very closely resemble Theobald, m form differing 
from it by their smooth shining surface. One of the most slender speci- 
i i y i xi i « 4 -WMmPss 3 mm. ; it has 10^ whorls and is 
mens measures : total length 15, thickness o > 
much attenuated towards the apex. 
The representation in the ‘ Conch. Indica’ must evidently be taken as 
that of true bacillum, of which, the authors of that work say two specimens 
were known at that time: one in Benson’s and the other in Theobalds col- 
lection. These are the two specimens to which Theobald (Journ. A. S B., 
1858, p. 321) refers under the name of ignota, as a provisional name, while 
the single specimen which he quotes 1. c. as ‘ G. Bacillun B.’ is a somewhat 
worn Cl. Asnhiensis, and hence Theobald’s reference that the species is of 
the type of G. insignis. I have carefully examined with Mr. Theobald his 
type specimens, and the question as regard the synonymy may be considered 
as settled ; the species must stand as recorded by Blanfoid. 
