ON COPHIAS AND BACHIA. 97 



as constituted by Dr. Boulengcr, 1885, Cat. Liz. Brit. 

 Mus., II, 417, wc find that because of application else- 

 Avliere neither Chalcides, Chalcis, Colobus, nor Micro- 

 dact\dus, sometime applied to one or others of the species, 

 is available, and we must turn to the next in order. One 

 of the included species, that described by Dumeril and 

 Bibron, 1839, Erp. Gen. v, 462, Chalcides D'Qrbignii, 

 was made the type of the genus Bachia by Gray, 1849, 

 Cat. Liz. B. M., 58. At the time this was the only spe- 

 cies. Boulenger, 1885, determines that three others are 

 congeneric. By extending the limits of the genus so as 

 to include them, and leaving the name Cophias to the 

 snakes, we shall solve the difficulty and preclude further 

 confusion. At present the following species are placed 

 in Bachia : 



B. U Orhignii D. & B ; Gray. Chile ; Venezuela. 



B. flavescens Bonnat. sp. Guiana ; Venezuela. 



B. heterqpus Boettg. sp. Central America. 



B, tridactylus Daud. sp. Hab? 



Mus. Goinp. ZooL, Cambridge, Mass. 



ESSEX INST. BULLETIN, VOL. XXIV 13 



