186 SUPPLEMENT TO THE CRAG MOLLUSCA. 
specimens with the shorter variety (fig. 12 6 of Tab. XI of Crag Moll.) of Rissow cos- 
tulata (PR. Stefanist of ‘Supplement,’ p. 73), and, allowing for the way in which they are 
worn, I cannot detect any difference between them. 
The Walton specimens, although worn, present in places the same ribs and the same 
cancellation as ornament the Cor. Crag specimen of this variety of Stefanisi ; and parti- 
cularly the form, relative dimensions, and position of the slight umbilicus are identical. 
I have not had the opportunity of examining the recent shells with which our fossils were 
identified, but if they be thus identical they can only, I think, belong to the shell figured 
126 of Tab. XI of the ‘Crag Mollusca.’ The description given by Mr. A. Bell of his 
new species Jeffreysii (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., May, 1871, p. 10) quite accords 
with the specimens I examined and with the shell figured by me in Tab. XI of my 
original work. 
Fossarus Lingonatus, 8S. Wood. Crag Moll., vol. i, p. 121, Tab. VIII, fig. 23 c—d, as 
var. /ineolatus of Fossarus sulcatus. 
Fossarus LINEOLATUS, S. Wood. Catalogue, 1840. 
In the ‘Crag Mollusca’ are figured two varieties of Fossarus sulcatus. Mr. Jeffreys 
has referred one of them (var. /xeolatus) to F. Japonicus, A. Adams. I have compared my 
Crag fossils with that recent species, and I believe them to be specifically distinct. The 
recent shell is shorter and more expanded, and it is ornamented with larger, coarser, and 
fewer ridges. 
I treated var. /neolatus as a distinct species in my catalogue of 1840; and in this case, 
as in many others, I am inclined to revert to my views of 1840, and to call this variety a 
distinct species under my original name of /neolatus. M. Weinkauff refers Mossarus 
sulcatus of ‘Crag Moll’ to minutus, Michaud, ‘ Bull. Soc. Linn.,’ IT, t. 122, figs. 7—9 ; 
but which of the two Crag varieties he thus refers I cannot make out. 
CycLostREMa L&vis ? Phi. Supplement, Crag Moll., p. 86, Tab. V, fig. 13. 
Since my Crag shell was figured Mr. Jeffreys has sent to me for examination a 
recent specimen which appears precisely to resemble my fossil, and this he considers to 
be a new species, and proposes for it the name of dasi-striata. He adds (in Lit.) that 
levis, Phil., is the same as serpulocdes, but is different from the Crag shell. I think with 
him that the Crag shell is distinct from serpuloides, and I so considered it at p. 86 of 
this Supplement, and if it should prove to be the case that the Crag shell is not identical 
with Philippi’s /evis, it will require a new specific designation, which may be that of éasz- 
striata, which Mr. Jeffreys proposes. 
