More than sixty years ago Cox described Voluta (Callipara) brazieri from Wooli Wooli, Clarence River, New South Wales, giving a coloured figure of the back view about two inches in length. The measurements of the shell read: length 1.10 inch, breadth 0.55 inch, i.e., 28 mm. by 14 mm.
Thirty years later the unique type passed into the collection of the British Museum, and Smith wrote a note pointing out the inadequacy of the illustration and redescribed it, giving another figure from in front, also about two inches long. Smith, however, concluded that it had been referred to Callipara from a vague resemblance only, and that it had more the characteristics of Lyria, and then suggested that it was merely a monstrous growth of Voluta deliciosa Montrouzier from New Caledonia. Acting upon Smith's advice, Hedley admitted Lyria deliciosa in his Check-List, synonymizing V. brazieri. However, Hedley also allowed Lyria nucleus Lamarck, the type of Lyria, under the name L. pattersonia Perry in that list. The latter is the type of Lyria, and deliciosa is merely the New Caledonian relative, pattersonia being a common Norfolk Island shell. It was apparent that both could not, under normal circumstances, occur in this State, and study of Cox's figure with Smith's illustration appeared to negative Smith's conclusion.
Mr. C. Laseron, who has been responsible for most of the recent additions to our local faunula, travelled to Forster, near Cape Hawke, and there secured many species from Point Halliday not common around Sydney. He enlisted the cooperation of a local naturalist, Mr. Muddle, who sent him more shells, and then recently brought some more down to Sydney. Among these, Mr. Laseron detected a strange little Volutid, which I immediately recognized as the missing Voluta brazieri Cox. It proved, certainly, that the original shell was normal, that it was not Lyria montrouzieri, and was not even congeneric. It was then found that Cox had been anticipated in his specific choice by Brazier; so that a new name is necessary. In view of the confusion surrounding the original shell now in the British Museum, I am not renaming that specimen, but am describing the shell before me as a new genus and species.