MICHIGAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCE. 89 



resemble each other so remarkably in all essential points, and differ 

 only in such minor details, if at all, that one is naturally led to inquire 

 if they are not the same. At Dr. Clark's suggestion I undertook a 

 detailed comparison and my results are presented herewith. 



In order to bring out clearly how strikingly similar these snakes are 

 according to Cope's own descriptions, the characters have here been 

 tabulated in parallel columns. Before going further it is well to note 

 that Cope's hrachystorna was described from one specimen and that 

 one alcoholic and just ready to shed its skin when captured. His 

 hiitlerii is based on two specimens. 



hr achy stoma hutlerii 



"Head not distinct from neck." "Head little distinct from neck. 



Labial plates g—- Labial plates "^E^ 



Oculers 1 — 3. Oculars 1 — 3. 



Temporals 1 — 2. Temporals 1 — 1. 



"Parietal scuta convex and not contracted "Parietal scuta abruptly contracted." 



posteriorly." 



Scale rows 19, all keeled. Scale rows 19, all keeled. 



Gastrosteges 132. Gastrosteges 144. 



Urosteges 72. Urosteges 62. 



HEAD. 



Beginning with the head Cope says of hrachy stoma "it is not distinct from the neck." 

 Concerning hutlerii he says "head very little distinct." This certainly does not constitute 

 a specific difference. 



LABIAL PLATES. 



The number of labial plates for brachystoma is |^| and for hutlerii -J^. It will be 

 noticed that the lower labials, the point in which hrachystoma is strikingly different from 

 e sirtalis sirtalis, are 8 — 8, exactly the same number as in hutlerii. Moreover in both 

 snakes the orbit is above two labials. In regard to the upper labials of which Cope's single 

 hrachystoma has 6 — 6 and his two hutlerii 7 — 7, it is interesting to note that nine of 

 Ruthven's twenty specimens have 6 — 6 supra labials, four have 6 — 7 and only seven 

 have 7 — 7. Of the Olivet specimens six have 6 — 6 supra labials, two have 6 — 7, 

 and one has 7 — 7. Summarizing these figures we find that out of these twenty-nine 

 hutlerii (lists of Dr. Clark and Mr. Ruthven), fifteen have 6—6 supra labials, six have 

 6 — 7 and eight have 7 — 7. Hence it seems quite clear that the mere fact of the 

 single hrachystoma having 6 — 6 supra labials does not in any way tend to prove that 

 it is not hutlerii. In fact it rather strengthens the inference that it is, since about 52 per 

 cent of hutlerii have 6 — 6, and only about 28 per cent have 7 — 7, the number given 

 by Cope for hutlerii, the remaining 20 per cent having 6 — 7 or 7 — 6. Indeed it seems 

 probable that 6 — 6 is the normal number of supra labials for hutlerii. 



OCULARS. 



Turning now to the oculars we frnd brachystoma and hutlerii agree and this number 

 (1 — 3) the statistics of Dr. Clark and Mr. Ruthven tend to corroborate although 

 twelve out of twenty-nine vary on one or both sides. 



TEMPORALS. 



Cope notes the temporals of brachystoma as 1 — 2 and of hutlerii as 1 — 1. Nine of 

 Ruthven's twenty hutlerii have 1 — 2, seven have 1 — 1 and three have j— and one 

 is not tabulated. The Olivet specimens are even more remarkable. Six of the 

 nine specimens have 1 — 2 temporals, only one has 1 — 1, one has 1 — 3 and one has 



j^. Summing up we find that fifteen out of the twenty-eight specimens {hutlerii) 

 or 53^ per cent have jE^ temporals, the number given for brachystoma, seven or twenty- 

 five per cent have j~, three have jE^, one has jE^, and one has j^. Here 

 again the fact that Cope's single hrachystoma had 1 — 2 temporals so far from con- 

 stituting a specific difference strengthens the view that brachystoma and hutlerii are identi- 

 12 



