672 AUSTRALIAN BATRACHIA, 



ligne jaune tres fine et plus courte," which, he says, is always 

 present in H. ewingii. The colouration of presei'ved specimens 

 of H. ewmgii differs within such considerable limits, according as 

 the individuals were exposed to strong light or were taken from 

 or kept in a dark place before preservation; according also as 

 whether the dark dorsal band commencing between the eyes, and 

 the canthal and temporal streaks ai-e ^'ery dark or very faint, or 

 whether the head and back are speckled all o\er with blackish as 

 may or may not l)e the case, etc., that A. Dumeril's supposed differ- 

 ences carr}' little weight. The only small Hylas known to us at 

 the present day with a colouration at all like that of //. ewingii, 

 and for which from a casual inspection it might be perhaps be 

 mistaken, are H. rtibella, U. dentata, and possibly H. adelaidensis; 

 but an examination of the vomerine teeth of the first two, and 

 the details of the colouration of the third, alone would prevent 

 any misconception. //. veri'eauxii was in all probability founded 

 on smooth specimens of //. eivingii which were bleached, or faintly 

 and unusually coloured : in which case the name is an absolute 

 .synonym of H. ewingii. The only other alternative seems to be 

 that H. verreauxii is a coloui'-variety of H. ewingii, which has 

 yet to be rediscovered, and of which only the types have ever 

 been seen. Mr. Krefft was certainl}' mistaken in supposing that 

 he had identified H. verreauxii, A. Dum., as common at Sydney, 

 or the Clarence Ri\er; in both cases I think he possibly confounded 

 it with H. dentata, at that time imperfectly known, as neither JEL. 

 ewingii nor any of its varietal forms has yet been recorded from 

 the Clarence or Richmond Rivers. 



//. jmrvidens, Peters, was founded in 1874 on a single specimen 

 from Port Phillip, but is still unknown to Victorian naturalists. 

 Admittedly it differs ivovuH. eivingii chiefly in respect of the smaller 

 tympanum (one-third the diameter of the eye), and the slightly 

 developed vomerine teeth. Since from the examination of only 

 about seventeen specimens Mr. Boulenger found it necessary to 

 allow for a A'ariation in the size of the tympanum of from "one- 

 half to two-thirds that of the eye," it seems to me that it need 

 not be a matter for any surprise if, when a more representative 



