194 NORTH AMERICAN MUSTELID^. 



sisting in an abnormal tumidity of the frontal region, arising 

 evidently from disease. It is a feature by no means confined 

 to the present example, but is merely an extreme enlargement 

 of the sinuses of the frontal region often seen in specimens of 

 the existing animal, evidently resulting from disease. In No. 

 917 (Albany, :N^. Y.), No. 8099 (Fort Cobb, Ind. T.), No. 1878 

 (Calcasieu Pass, La.), and No. 1620 (Indianola, Tex,), the same 

 tendency is strongly marked, which, in some of these speci- 

 mens, had they attained equal age, must have resulted in a 

 malformation nearly or quite as great as is seen in the fossil 

 skull in question. 



" In this connection, I may add that a pretty careful exam- 

 ination of the fossil remains of Carmvora^ collected by Profes- 

 sor Baird many years since from the bone-caves of Pennsylva- 

 nia (of which this fossil skull of the Skunk forms a part), has 

 failed to show any of them to be specifically different from the 

 species now or recently living in the same region. Many of 

 them are remains of individuals of large size, but not exceed- 

 ing the dimensions of the specimens of the recent animal from 

 the same or contiguous regions. These remains include, among 

 others, the following species : — Lynx rufus, Urocyon virginianus, 

 Mustela pennaiiti, Mustela americana, Piitorius vison, Lutra cana- 

 densis^ Mephitis mephitica (other specimens than the ^frontata'' 

 skull), Procyon lotor^ Ursus america7ius, etc." 



Granting that the probabilities are against the validity of 

 the species, it may be observed that the disease theory is not 

 proven, and that no recent specimens of Mephitis have been 

 found to match this one. 



This species, so far as I am aware, is the only fossil Skunk 

 described as such ; but compare antea, p. 18, on the question 

 of *' Galera " perdicida. 



The Genus MEPHITIS. (Cuvier.) 



X Viverra sp., of some early authors. 



< Mephitis, Cuvier, "Le9ons d'Anat. i. 1800" (coextensive with the subfamily), and of 



authors generally.— Baird, M. K A. 1857, 191. 



< Chincba, Less. ]^ouv. Tab. R. An. 1842. 



> Spilogale, Gray, Proc. Zoiil. Soc. 1865, 150. (Type, S. inter rupta = M. putorius.) 



> Mephitis, Oill, Arrang. Fam. Mamm. 1872, 66 (restricted to subg. Mephitis as char- 



acterized in this paper).— Cotter, Bull. TJ. S. Geol. Surv. 2d ser. i. 1875 (same re- 

 striction). 



For characters, see a preceding page (p. 192). 

 The several North American species of Mephitis proper (as 

 restricted to exclude Spilogale) indicated by authors are re- 



