332 BARBOUR: ZOOGEOGRAPHY. 



be no possible question as to the fact that these are the actual types. They had 

 been relabeled by Garman as Uromacer oxyrhyncus, but they really belong with 

 this distinct species. The specimens are No. 3,345, M. C. Z., two examples from 

 Haiti, and No. 3,610 M. Z. C, two examples from Jeremie. Garman in his 

 description, undoubtedly by a lapsus calami, credited all four specimens to 

 Jeremie, Haiti (Proc. Amer. philos. soc, 1887, 24, p. 284). In Mr. Mann's 

 collection there are three from Diquini, Haiti and one from Manneville. 



Uromacer oxyrhynchus Dum^kil et Bibron. 



DuM^RiL et Bibron, Erp6t. g^n., 18.54, 7, p. 722, pi. 8.3, fig. 1. Boulengek, Cat. snakes Brit. mus. 

 1894, 2, p. 116. 



The third and last member of this genus is, of course, also from Haiti only. 

 The specimens in the Museum are from Santiago de la Vega, collected by Mr. 

 A. H. Verrill; Samana, San Domingo, collected by Mr. M. A. Frazar, and 

 Diquini from Mr. W. M. Mann. Other examples are simply labeled Haiti. 

 There is no evidence from the material preserved here to show that the species 

 of Uromacer are confined to particular ranges within the area of the island. 



Hypsirhynchus ferox Gunther. 



GtJNTHER, Cat. snakes Brit, mus., 1858, p. 48. Boulenger, Cat. snakes Brit, mus., 1894, 2, p. 117, 

 pi. 6, fig. 1. 



This species was originally described as coming from Barbados, and became 

 established in the literature as a Barbadian anomaly. Thus Wallace mentions 

 it in the Geographical distribution of animals (2, p. 72). Boulenger, however, 

 has shown that the type was purchased for the British museum from Hugh 

 Cuming, and that all his collection contains only species characteristic of Haiti 

 or San Domingo. The genus is, then, a monotypic one, confined to the island. 

 Hypsirhynchus scalaris Cope, the type of which is No. 1,517, M. C. Z. was de- 

 scribed when H. ferox was supposed to come from Barbados; and the distance 

 of that island from Haiti may have suggested the supposed distinctness of the 

 species. Cope's type appears to be sightly abnormal in that it lacks a loreal. 

 This would not seem sufficient to establish a species when only one specimen is 

 known which is characterized in this way. 



Mr. Mann's collection contains an example from Momance, and another 

 from Manneville. Both perfectly typical. 



