398 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF [1895. 



at their ends. Inhabits Carolina." On the margin of the same 

 page he gives the number "13" and the English specific name 

 "Cinereous," belonging to the description. He gives no synonymy 

 nor reference to Catesby as in the description of frogs immediately 

 preceding this one, and there is little doubt that he based this 

 Cinereous Frog on a specimen in his possession preserved in spirits 

 and sent him from "Carolina." On a preceding page he considers 

 the same frog as figured by Catesby, viz.: the "Green Tree Frog, 

 Catesby II, 71," to be identical with the " Rana arborea^ of 

 Linnaeus. 



How Giinther could have imposed such a forgery as " Calamita 

 carolinensis Pennant," on himself seems inexplicable and that this 

 nomen spurium should have been perpetuated to the present day as 

 a valid name is scarcely less astonishing. Professors S. and H. 

 Garman seem to have had doubts about the name carolinensk and 

 the former in his work on the Herpetology of Illinois rightly adopts 

 the name einerea of Schneider (Calamita cinerea Schn., Hist. Amph. 

 1799, p." 174) for this species. 



On examining Schneider's description the mystery is largely 

 explained. Under the division "XI, Oinereus' n of his genus "Cala- 

 mitce " it begins with the following sentence: " In Pennanti Zoologia 

 Arctica II, p. 331, edit. sec. Calamita Carolinensis describitur sub- 

 eodem nomine veluti species nova." The remainder of Schneider's 

 description is a latinized version of the one given by Pennant above 

 quoted. Giinther mistook Schneider to mean that Pennant had 

 given the Cinereous Frog a binomial and, without verifying the 

 reference ' ' Calamita Carolinensis " gave it precedence over 

 Schneider's name cinerea ! 



Prof. Garman, in trying to correct Giinther' s error has committed 

 a precisely similar one by construing Schneider to mean by the 

 phrase "describitur sub-eodem nomine " that Pennant had used the 

 name "Cinereous" in a binomial sense, so he makes it (Synop. 

 Rept. Amph., Ills., p. 346), " Hyla cinerea Pennant." 



I found this species abundant on the margins of Reelfoot Lake. 

 The specimens taken strongly emphasize the validity of the western 

 semifasciata form, described by Hallowell, as compared with Caro- 

 lina and Florida examples of cinerea. Among the more constant 

 distinguishing characters shown by my series, is the large size, robust 

 form, obtuse snout, relatively short hind leg (heel not reaching end 



