Type specimens of Mollusca described by Col. George Montagu in the Royal Albert Memorial Museum & Art Gallery, Exeter and The Natural History Museum, London

A complete list of new molluscan taxa introduced by Col. George Montagu (1753–1815) is presented. The available type material of these taxa are itemised and illustrated. The majority are present in the Royal Albert Memorial Museum & Art Gallery, Exeter with a smaller number in the Natural History Museum, London. The historic background of both collections is reviewed with special reference to the many non-British species spuriously introduced into Testacea Britannica and its Supplement.


Introduction
This paper is primarily a catalogue aimed at increasing access to type and potential type specimens of molluscan species described by Colonel George Montagu (1753Montagu ( -1815. The focus is on the presence and status of extant material but these specimens date from the Regency period when taxonomy was in its infancy and was carried out by an eclectic group of naturalists. The biographical details of these early collectors are as interesting as the shells they described but these are stories for a different time and not explored in detail here. Wider perspectives on Montagu can be gleaned from Cleevely (1979), Swanton (1908) and Cummings (1915). For his relationships with other naturalists of the day, especially William Elford Leach we refer the reader to Harrison and Smith (2008). Montagu is also discussed in relation to collecting versus science by Tobin (2014) in her exploration of the Duchess of Portland collection. The following details are extracted from these references.
Montagu had always been interested in natural history but in his early years was a career soldier rising to the rank of Colonel. Soldiering started early, and at the age of seventeen he was commissioned as an officer with postings in England and Ireland. He was posted to America in 1776 and fought in the War of Independence, where despite the conflict he found time to shoot and collected, to what to him, were exotic birds. In 1773 he married his first wife, Ann Courtenay (niece of the 3rd Earl of Bute, John Stuart) with whom he had six children. In 1777 he left the regular army but obtained a commission in the Wiltshire Regiment of militia rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. In 1789 he wrote to Gilbert White "that were he not bound by conjugal attachment he would have liked to ride his hobby into distant parts" suggesting that he felt trapped in his marriage. Around 1795 he met Eliza D'Orville who was to become his mistress and in 1798 he moved to Devon with Eliza. This caused scandal among his society friends, family and the army and he was court-martialled under the pretence of "actions prejudicial to junior officers". Once in Devon he devoted himself to researching and publishing on a diverse range of animals, notably birds and molluscs. Eliza often beautifully illustrated his publications and it was through their son Henry D'Orville that a collection went to Exeter in 1874. Montagu's most notable works are his Ornithological Dictionary of 1802 and his Testacea Britannica of 1803 & 1808. In 1815 Montagu stood on a rusty nail and developed tetanus from which he died on the 20th of June that year.
The majority of new taxa described by Montagu are to be found in Testacea Britannica (1803) and its Supplement (1808). Montagu also wrote some short papers in the Transactions of the Linnean Society and these also include descriptions of new species of mollusc (Montagu, 1804(Montagu, , 1813(Montagu, , 1816 read in 1811).

The Montagu Collection in London
The Montagu collection in the Natural History Museum, London is inextricably linked to William Elford Leach (1791Leach ( -1836 and most of the information here has been extracted from Harrison and Smith (2008). Leach trained as a physician but had always been an enthusiastic naturalist and was introduced to Montagu by Charles Prideaux. Charles Prideaux (1782-1868) was a cousin of Leach and a conchologist, giving his name to molluscs such as Rhomboidella prideauxi (Leach, 1815) and crustaceans such as Pagurus prideauxi (Leach, 1815). Leach went on to be the zoologist at the British Museum forging an illustrious if stressful career from 1813-1822 (Harrison and Smith, 2008). Leach and Montagu went on collecting expeditions together and one can consider Montagu to be a major influence on Leach's life. Consequently Leach was an enthusiastic promoter of the Montagu collection, which he pursued until its purchase by the Trustees of the British Museum. Montagu died in June 1815 and with-in a month Leach had begun to persuade the trustees to purchase the collection but a decision was not made until early in 1816. The sum of £1100 was agreed with Eliza D'Orville but she was not finally paid until 1819.
Reorganisation of the shell collection was started by Leach and Prideaux and some of this work was done as early as late 1816; but not in the museum but in Leach's family home in Spitchwick, South Devon. The collection was in Montagu House (British Museum), London in 1817 but it was stored in the basement and was beginning to deteriorate. Montagu House is in no way connected to Col. Montagu, the two being entirely coincidental. The collection was still in the basement in November 1818 and Leach had not yet completed the re-arrangement. Leach's prodigious output took its toll and in 1821 he suffered a mental breakdown that resulted in his resignation in 1822. Leach had embarked on his own treatise and produced a part draft manuscript in 1818 that was finally published by Gray in 1852 (Leach in Gray 1852). This may suggest that Leach never finished the rearrangement of the Montagu collection of shells and the majority of shells never left the basement of the museum. Whatever the actual events were, JG Jeffreys (1863) was prompted to write that "Nearly the whole of his priceless collection of British shells....has been lost to science...the few specimens that are still preserved were many years ago removed from their original tablets, no care having apparently been taken in the course of rearrangement to retain the names affixed by the donor to the types". Consequently the collection that Leach extolled as being a complete representation of the British Mollusca is now reduced to 26 species.
What remains of this collection now exists in a variety of mounts and boxes. Few can be traced directly to the Montagu collection with only a few original labels recognised by JRLeB Tomlin (Fig. I1a, b). Two forms of early label are now to be found, those identified by Tomlin and a second with a distinctive Capital letter for the genus followed by a colon before the species name (Fig. I1c,d). The wooden blocks (Fig. I1e,f) are usually attributed to the remounting done by JE Gray and his wife ME Gray during the period 1840-1870. The writing on the front of these blocks is not that of Montagu and all data added either came from original labels (now lost) or have been taken from publications.
Nowhere in Exeter or in London are examples of Montagu's labels that append his name as the authority of the species name. We conclude that any label carrying a 'Montagu' or 'Mont' attribution has been added at a later date. Similarly the annotation 'Mus. Montagu' is a secondary attribution. The first attempt to identify the remnants of the Montagu collection seems to be the efforts of JRLeB Tomlin as noted by Dean (1936). The handwritten pencil annotations on the rear of the blocks are post 1870 but in an, as yet, unidentified hand. The mounting of very small specimens on black shiny thin paper (Fig. I1g) can, from the paper, be dated to the late 19th early 20th centuries and from some labels it can be seen that GW Chaster (1863-1910  examined and photographed at least one shell in 1896. George Chaster was a polymath naturalist, his interest in molluscs centred on the Pyramidellidae introducing genera such as Jordaniella, Cima and Spiralinella. The uncertainties in provenance are further exacerbated by the presence of shells that in no way conform to the original descriptions or figures and these are further evidence of the early disruption of this collection.   in the Mollusc Register (Fig. I2). Each lot of specimens was assigned a sequential four-digit number from Moll3639 to Moll4537 (Fig. I2a), against which D'Urban recorded the species, number of specimens and occasional details about how they were stored. Frequently two names appear against any one lot (Fig. I2b), the upper contemporary with 1874 and mostly following Jeffreys (1863-67); the lower in smaller writing is the name given by Montagu and may or may not be on a label with the specimens. These names often are indicative of potential type status.

The Montagu Collection in Exeter
When donated the collection consisted of 895 lots but with little data other than the name and no indication of type status. Specimens from 676 of these lots remain, from which we have identified 84 lots containing potential types. D'Urban's original numbering system is still in use today. However, in 1976 the curator at that time Figure I2. Extracts from the original register of the Montagu collection in RAMM, Exeter. a numbering sequence starting at 3639 b double entries, the lower giving the original Montagu name. c beginning of the "box numbers" of material no longer present. d pencil annotation identifying actions of Rosemary Brind, 1979. e pencil tick marks indicating lot found in 1979. f "T" mark indicating type status as recognised by Brind (1979) g dual naming of lots contained in boxes but no longer present.
(Mr Kelvin Boot) began to re-accession the collection under the registration number 63/1976 but the process was abandoned. Cate (1979) is the only author to reference this system.
Many of the smaller shells in the collection were, and still are, glued to pieces of dark blue octagonal card (Fig. I3a, b). A printed label bearing the species name ( Fig. I3b) is often attached to the front of the card. A man-uscript label written in Montagu's hand (Fig. I3a) may be found fixed to the back of the card and projecting to one side. In a few cases both are present. On a few occasions the blue card is attached to an urn-shaped wooden plinth (Fig. I3c). It is likely that it was Montagu who mounted them in this manner, as we have no indication that his son Henry had any interest in the shells, other than one assumes sentimental. Some large bivalves have the orig- Figure I3. Labels and mounts associated with the Montagu collection in RAMM, Exeter. a Montagu hexagonal blue card with specimen and original hand written label b Montagu hexagonal blue card with specimens and original printed label c Montagu hexagonal blue card with specimen attached to a wooden urn-shaped plinth. d Original label attached to inside of shell e RAMM registration disc attached to shell f Early block with green paper cover with Montagu hexagonal card attached g. "Rowley box" mount with glass topped boxes containing Montagu hexagonal cards inal identification labels adhered directly onto the shell (Fig. I3d) or have a registration numbered disc attached to them (Fig. I3e). In most cases the cards and typed labels still exist but the handwritten identifications survive less frequently. No locality information survives, so any collecting data has been inferred from the publications. It is not known how the cards were stored when the collection was first presented.
Once at RAMM the specimens and their cards, where present, were mounted on wooden boards covered with pale green paper (Fig. I3f), presumably for display. A few of these boards are still present but many of the specimens and cards have fragments of adhesive and green paper still attached to the reverse face.
At a later date, the curator, FR Rowley transferred the specimens to bespoke card trays (Fig. I3g), which we refer to here as "Rowley boxes". Larger specimens were mounted in open trays on cotton wool, while smaller shells were placed inside glass-topped boxes. Each tray was given a typed label listing the current identification, presumed collection location, donor, registry numbers and 'Montagu Collection'. Rowley describes his method at length in The Museums Journal in 1910.
Montagu's collection is no longer on display and instead stored in a 20 drawer wooden cabinet where the majority of specimens are still arranged in Rowley's boxes. Previously identified potential type material has been indicated using green adhesive stars or discs (Fig. I3g). Following this review the type lots will be re-housed in modern micro-storage.
RAMM's mollusc register has been annotated over the years indicating the specimens found to be present in the collection. The most recent inventory was carried out by a previous curator (Rosemary Brind) and published in the Biology Curators Group Newsletter (Brind 1979). She annotated the original register ( Fig. I2d) with pencil ticks if present (Fig. I2e) and 'T's to indicate type lots (Fig. I2f). She confirmed the presence of lots Moll3639-4314 (676 in total) but not Moll4315-4537 (222 lots). Interestingly, the register specifies that these lots were split between 13 boxes (Fig. I2c) numbered 1-3, 5-10, 12, 14, 16 and 'long box'. The missing box numbers in this sequence do not appear to have been allocated to any other lots in the Mollusc Register and earlier Montagu lots have not been allocated a box number. Also unlike earlier Montagu lots, the register shows two columns of entries for each lot; on the left 'Montagu's names' and on the right 'Jeffreys' names' with a running specimen number for each lot starting at 1 for each box (Fig. I2g). Most entries have identifications in both columns, except for Moll4315-4337 and a few scattered examples where the Jeffreys' name has been left blank and for Moll4355-4373 the Montagu name is missing. Both columns are in D'Urban's hand. A thorough search for Moll4315-4537 in RAMM's wider mollusc collection has been undertaken since Brind's inventory but none have been located.
The presence of 'Jeffreys' names' in the Mollusc Register offers one possible explanation for the missing specimens. In 1879 Gwyn Jeffreys reports that D'Urban enabled him to examine the Montagu collection. Jeffreys' paper is puzzling in that it mentions only a small part of the collection and some taxa that are not present in the Mollusc Register, but it does list specimens from the missing lots. For example, "Pecten laevis" can be traced in the register to Moll4385, "T.
[urbo] cimex" to Moll4465 and "T. calathiscus?" to Moll4464. If we were to assume that Jeffreys borrowed this portion of the collection to re-identify might we assume that they were never returned? If they were retained by Jeffreys they are likely to be in his collection, which he sold to the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, USA. Investigation of the US National Natural History Museum's online database has uncovered two lots in Jeffreys' collection, which bear initial name combinations that would have been used by Montagu. It is possible that USNM 149118 "Pecten subauriculata" refers to the shells cited by Jeffreys in his 1879 paper but there are no shells bearing this name in the register. Numerous specimens in the Jeffreys collection carry additional names with old combinations that were not used by Jeffreys such as the rissoids referred to the genus Turbo. While they may indicate a link to Montagu this is not conclusive as it has not be possible to identify their provenance. All the old labels have been removed from the Jeffreys collection and therefore there is no proof that Montagu material was incorporated.
J. Davy Dean reported on the collection in 1936 but he does not mention the missing lots. He states that 'the Montagu Cabinet at Exeter contains 220 species and varieties' and lists 31 species by name, which are present in the collection and first described by Montagu. These lots were subsequently listed by Brind (1979).

Spurious species
One puzzling aspect of Testacea Britannica and the Supplement is the inclusion of exotic species that are not part of the British malacofauna. For use in nomenclature, these taxa are especially vexing as their provenance is so uncertain and the condition and number of shells is far from ideal. Montagu himself seems to be cautious about accepting some shells but was also keen not to offend those who sent them. In the preface of Testacea Britannica (1803 p. xi) he writes "Aware that some shells have been given as English which never originated there, we have been cautious of admitting anything but upon the best authority; and where we have expressed doubt, we beg it may not be considered an arrogance, or contempt for the opinion of others".
His wishing not to offend may have resulted in part from the exclusion from his family and friends following his scandal over living with Eliza. However, two of his new friends appeared to have an uncanny ability to discover new species and send them to Montagu.
The first is Capt. John Laskey a rather enigmatic character of who there are mixed opinions. For what we know of Laskey we are very grateful to Geoff Hancock (Hunterian Museum, Glasgow) and Fred Woodward (ex Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, Glasgow) and here we only elucidate aspects that have bearing on the status of species described by Montagu. John (sometimes as James) Laskey trained as a solicitor in Devon and had an early interest in both history and natural history as can be seen in various articles in the Gentleman's Magazine through the 1790s. In 1798 he joins the North Devon Militia then in 1804 the Kirkcudbright and Wigtown Militia and moves to Scotland. His interest in conchology develops around this time and while in Scotland he joins the Wernerian Society in Edinburgh. While stationed at Port Seton just to the east of Edinburgh he makes extensive collections at various sites throughout the Firth of Forth and most particularly around Dunbar. In 1811 (read 1809) he published his "Account of North British Testacea" and notified his attention to leave a collection of his shells with the Wernerian Society. It is from these collections that Laskey sends many new species to Montagu that are published in the Supplement to Testacea Britannica in 1808.
In 1813 Laskey's guide to the collections of the Hunterian Museum in Glasgow is published. He goes on to write on Napoleonic medals and the Elgin Marbles and these apparently laudable actions contrast with the views of some of his peers and by later conchologists.
In 1814 WE Leach, Keeper of Zoology in the British Museum, in a letter to Robert Jameson wrote (reproduced from Harrison and Smith 2008 Laskey (1811); these were all considered spurious by Forbes and Hanley (1853), but did accept that they could have originated from dumped ships' ballast. A closer examination of Laskey's 1811 paper on North British Testacea reveals further inaccuracies. Laskey boasts that he has added "near 50 new species of Testacea to the North British fauna" but most of these have never been found on the east coast of Scotland or indeed in British waters. A typical example is his entry for Tellina striata, a Caribbean shell that he states he found at Dunbar but Montagu states it was found at Weymouth by Bryer. This would seem to be a clear example of Laskey attempting to boost his list for the 1811 paper.
One plausible source of exotic species would be ships ballast as proposed by Gray (1879) in a notice on Laskey. The number of new species added by and the inaccuracies in Laskey's paper lead one to agree with Jeffreys that Laskey was, to say the least, being inventive. Laskey is perhaps trying to impress others and possibly ingratiate himself with the academic circles of the day.
By way of contradiction in Laskey's annotated copy of his North British Testacea (held in the archives of the Mollusca Section of the NHMUK) we find him referring to some discoveries as being accidental and recognizing shells not to be of British origin. On p. 35 (Fig. I5) under Trochus cinereus of Donovan and Montagu, he states "This shell is from the Mediterranean, tho figured by Da Costa first and followed by Donovan and again cited by Montagu from their authority, it is decidedly not British". If he was aware of the exotic nature of some shells why did he not acknowledge this for the many obvious spurious species that he passed to Montagu? Laskey sold a collection of his own in 1808 but it contained very few shells. It appears that on his death in 1829 Laskey's shells and books passed to a Dr. J. Brown. This gentleman's collection was put up for sale in 1836 at which Edward Forbes purchased Laskey's annotated copy of North British Testacea along with some shells that are now in the NHMUK London.
Laskey's name also becomes linked with the Duchess of Portland collection, part of which Laskey had in his possession. This series of British land and freshwater shells he acquires as duplicates of lot 2487 and these he sends to Montagu in 1806 for his inclusion in the Supplement to Testacea Britannica (Montagu 1808). In an annotated copy of the Portland Catalogue (Lightfoot 1786b) (held in the National Museum of Wales) lot 2487 was bought by Cash in 1786 and consisted of a series of shells identified by Lightfoot. Lightfoot (1786a) published these in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society and are therefore potentially type specimens. A letter, held in the archives of the Linnean Society, London, from Laskey to Montagu listing these and discussing other shells is illustrated here (Fig. I4).
The second collector associated with spurious species is Mr Bryer of Weymouth who Montagu acknowledges for access to his shell cabinet and donation of specimens. Six species described as new by Montagu are included, all collected from Weymouth and all now declared to be of West Indian origin. Mr Bryer is also credited for supplying shells to Pulteney (1799), some of which are also exotic. From the works of Maton and Racket (1807) and Montagu (1808) it appears that Mr Bryer died around 1806. On page 36 of the Supplement (1808) Montagu indicates that the Bryer cabinet was given to him by Mrs Bryer.
"For the knowledge of this nondescript species we are indebted to Mrs Bryer, relict of our late valuable friend, who has so largely contributed towards the former part of this work. This lady has continued that liberality which so conspicuously marked the scientific researches of our much lamented friend, by presenting us with his cabinet, which consists of most species of shells belonging to the coast about Weymouth, amongst which we had the pleasure to observe this marked as indigenous" The only Bryer that we can link to Weymouth and dying between the publication of the Testacea Britannica in 1803 and the Supplement in 1808 is a surgeon, Stephen Perrot Bryer. His profession would fit well with his scientific interests but, if it is he, he died at the early age of 36 years. This Mr Bryer is mentioned in the account of the maritime disaster of the grounding and loss of six ships of a squadron bound for the West Indies under the leadership of Admiral Christian (Smith 1796, Boult 2003. These ships were lost in a single day in 1795 along the length of Chesil Beach. Mr Bryer is noted for his efforts in tending survivors. Given the extent of shipping linked to the West Indies at this time it is possible that Bryer found exotic shells in dumped ballast or ballast from wrecks. Although Capt. Laskey was a prolific supplier of exotic shells he and Mr Bryer were not alone in accepting these as British. Da Costa (1788), Pulteney (1799), Montagu (1803, Donovan (1804) all include exotic shells in their works. The extent of lending and exchanging shells was prolific at this time so that the possibilities for error were great. Tobin (2014) notes that Pulteney exchanged shells with the Duchess of Portland and that she gave him exotic shells, some of which by error may have been reported as coming from Weymouth, a favoured collecting spot of the Duchess's.
We will probably never discover the true source of these shells or the motivation behind their inclusion in the British fauna but the nomenclature based upon them is problematic. Using such poorly defined names to overturn accepted nomenclature is not recommended here especially as the type localities cannot be verified.

Montagu shells in other collections
It will be seen that neither RAMM nor the NHMUK collections individually or together entirely represent the totality of Montagu's molluscan species. Montagu was given access to or was donated specimens from a number of collectors who also held collections. Without type material in London or Exeter these collections could hold  material suitable for designation as lectotype or neotype. Conversely, the Montagu collection has been used as source of neotypes for species described by associates of Montagu or whose descriptions he followed. Below is a list of possible collections and their locations if known, but unfortunately most have been lost.

Overbeck's Museum & Garden
It had been rumoured that Overbecks, a National Trust property in Salcombe, Devon, also has shells from Montagu's collection. However, there is no evidence to suggest Montagu had any connection to the shells in their possession (pers. comm. Emma Gatehouse, Senior Visitor Experience Officer 24/10/2016).

Birmingham City Museum
In 1962 Mr Fred Woodward purchased the shell collection of the Athenaeum Museum in Barnstaple, North Devon for the Birmingham City Museum. In a letter to R. Cleevely he states that it included the cabinet of a Miss Hill, dat-ing from around 1800, in which were shells from Montagu and Turton (R. Cleevely and F. Woodward pers. comm.). A typescript of the contents (courtesy of F. Woodward) confirms that Miss Hill was in Torquay in 1812 and at some time collected snails from Col. Montagu's pond at Knowle House. At the time of writing this collection could not be recognised in Birmingham City Museum.

Smithsonian (Jeffreys collection)
While we have surmised that Jeffreys may have acquired part of the Montagu collection left to RAMM there is no evidence of this from the Smithsonian catalogue.

Laskey and Wernerian Society Collections
The Wernerian Society collections were most likely incorporated into Edinburgh University and subsequently into the National Museums Scotland, but there are no specimens that can be identified as such. The only Laskey shells to be identified are in the Natural History Museum, London.

Boys & Walker
William Boys (naturalist) and George Walker (illustrator) collaborated on the production of the description of microscopic shells collected in the region around Sandwich in Kent (Walker 1784). Montagu makes frequent reference to this work and to shells acquired from Boys. The names in Boys and Walker are not binomial so not available but the descriptions were adopted by Montagu and any existing collection would be particularly useful in resolving the actual identity of these minute shells. We have been unable to locate any relevant collection.

John Adams of Pembroke
John Adams of Pembroke (1769-1798) wrote a number of papers in the late 18th century describing small molluscs from Wales (Adams 1797a(Adams , b, 1800a. Montagu refers to these and Adams' names frequently have priority over those of Montagu. The fate of Adams' collection is not known and in lieu of this neotypes have been selected from the Montagu collection (see under Turbo interstinctus in catalogue).
John Adams belonged to a landed family living at Holyland, Pembroke. He graduated from Christ's College Cambridge with a BA in 1791. He was admitted to the Linnean Society in 1795 and read his first paper that year. His fellowship was recommended by William Curtis, James Sowerby and Thomas Marsham. Adams tragically drowned while collecting on the coast of south Wales. It should be noted that the type localities of Adams are all in Wales. Reference to "The Wash" does not refer to the location in the east of England but to a small rocky inlet on the south coast of Pembrokeshire not far from Adams' home. A biography of John Adams by Graham Oliver is in preparation.

Catalogue
The listings below include entries for all known molluscan taxa introduced by George Montagu in his publications of 1803, 1804, 1808, 1813, 1816.
Line 1 gives the original name as given by Montagu. Line 2 gives the current name and superfamily and family placement. The synonymy of marine taxa follows WoRMS and the non-marine fauna follows Fauna Europaea (Bank and Ramos 2013). Where names could not be found in these lists the source of any synonymy is given. Line 3 gives the full original reference Line 4 gives the recorded localities as given by Montagu, therefore type localities. None of the original labels indicate the locality; all are subsequently inferred from literature. Following this gives the data on available specimens, any confirmed designations and our suggested type status. Wherever possible we have tried to give accurate determinations to the type material but we are not expert across the range of taxa included here. Anyone wishing to make lectotype selections is strongly advised to research the original descriptions, figures and specimens and not to rely unquestioning on this catalogue. The primary aim here is to make the collection available to research and is not definitive.
accinctus Murex Montagu, 1808. (Fig. 1) Kurtziella accinctus   We know that Laskey was in correspondence with Montagu and although the collection locality does not match that given by Montagu it is quite likely that these shells correspond to those described by Montagu. They closely match figure Tab. 5, fig. 1 in Testacea Britannica and also, but less so, Tab. 1, fig.10 in Maton and Racket 1807. In WoRMS M. dealbata is assigned to the genus Macrotoma but from the figure in Montagu 1803 and from the present shells this placement is not supported. The identification of these shells was confirmed by Javier Signorelli (pers. comm).  Breure (pers. comm.); the reticulate protoconch ( Fig. 23.3) confirming the family placement. The type specimens were said to be collected from freshwater pools and streams but Drymaeus is a genus of tropical land snails. Whether more than one taxon is involved can no longer be clarified nor can the identity of the shell seen by Jeffreys be substantiated. The only records of B. guadalupensis in the Jeffreys collections refer to 2 specimens from "New Sth. Wales" (USNM 67239). If the locality does refer to New South Wales in Australia then this record is also erroneous as that species is also West Indian and only recently found as an introduction (Breure 1974). Given that the labels in the Jeffreys collection in the USNM have been transposed from the original then the locality may be a corruption and indeed refer to Wales in the British Isles.  Brind (1979). There is an extensive correspondence between Kelvin Boot of RAMM and Kathy Way of the NHMUK with Crawford Cate during 1976 concerning potential type material. This centred on recognising type material for both Trivia europaea and T. arctica. The twelve shells present were photographed in the Natural History Museum London and subsequently used in Cate, 1979. Of these 12 shells 3 bear spots and one was selected by Cate (1979, p. 26-28, Fig. 19) as the Lectotype of Cypraea europaea Montagu (cited as RAMM 63/1976.1 (c) now EXEMS Moll4248/1. We regard the other 2 as Paralectotypes EXEMS Moll4248/3-4. Of the remaining 8 ribbed shells that do not bear spots Cate selected one as a Hypotype of T. arctica and this is recognised here as EXEMS Moll4248/2. The remaining 7 shells have no status. The remaining juvenile shell EXEMS Moll4248/12 was probably that recognised by Brind (1979) as representing Cypraea bullata and can be regarded as a Syntype of that taxon. In Cate (1979) the RAMM shells were re-accessioned as 63/1976.1-2 but this system has been abandoned.