226 MAJOR F. WALL. 1.M.S., C.M.Z.S. 
As regards the shields referred to by Mr. Boulenger as internasals (the sole 
remaining difference between the two supposed forms) it appears to me that the 
nasals have been divided into three parts by three sutures radiating from the nostril, 
and “‘pseudo-internasals”’ thus formed. This view is the obvious one suggested by 
analogy, and, when the three component parts are taken together, it will be noticed 
they conform to the normal shape of the nasal shields seen in others of this family. 
A precisely similar division is met with in aberrant examples of vipertna and major 
and in Enhydrina valakadyn, etc., and the condition reminds one of that seen in the 
parietals in Enhydris curtus, which shields, though broken up, preserve their contour. 
I may remark on other specimens I have examined. One in the Indian Museum, v72., 
No. 8240 (in which the scales are 31 anteriorly, 43 in midbody, imbricate posteriorly, 
ventrals 338) has the second, third and fifth supralabials divided as in the type of 
hendersont, and the fourth entire on both sides. Strictly speaking, the third, fourth 
and fifth touch the eye. I enter the condition in my note-books thus 9; 12 (2 43) §, 
the bracketed figures of the formula implying contact with the eye. 
In another specimen of mine from Burma (in which the scales are 32 anteriorly, 
42 in midbody, imbricate posteriorly, ventrals 311) the supralabials are 9, the second 
and all the succeeding shields are divided, and the fourth and fifth only touch the eye. 
In another specimen of mine from Burma (in which the scales are 31 anteriorly, 39 
in midbody, imbricate posteriorly, ventrals 325), the supralabials are 9, the fifth 
and subsequent shields are divided on the right side, the second, fourth and succeed- 
ing shields on the left, and the third, fourth and fifth touch the eye. Exactly parallel 
variations are to be met with in specimens of cyanocincta, ornata, etc., in the same 
genus, and in Astrotia stokes:, Enhydrina valakadyn, etc 
Description. —Neck one-third to two-fifths the greatest body depth. Rostral,— 
the portion visible above is from half to three-fifths the suture between the nasals. 
Prefrontals,—touch no supralabial. (It does so on one side only in two speci- 
mens). Frontal, is very distinctive, and differs from all the others of this genus, 
in that the fronto-parietal sutures are about twice as long as the fronto-preefrontals. 
Preoculars,—one or two independently of any division of the subjacent labials. 
Postoculars,—two or three. (One on one side in two examples). Temporals,— 
irregular and scale-like ; two or three superposed anteriorly. S upralabials,—very 
inconstant. All are liable to be divided transversely, and by their division scales 
formed which may occupy the position of loreals, pre-, sub- or postoculars and tem- 
porals; the third and fourth, or third, fourth and fifth may touch the eye. Infra- 
labials,— the fourth is the largest of the series and in contact with three or four 
scales behind; the suture between the first pair subequal to that between the anterior 
sublinguals. Marginals,—one after the third infralabial usually (rarely two after 
the second. In two examples they are completely absent). Sublinguals,—two 
fairly well-developed pairs, the posterior fellows separated. (In contact in four 
examples). Costals, anterior 27 to 32, midbody 36 to 43, posterior 36'to 42; 
imbricate throughout. Ventrals,—311 to 339, entire, and nearly twice as broad as 
the last costal row throughout. Colour,—olivaceous green dorsally, merging to 
