A MONOGRAPH OF THE SEA-SNAKES (HYDROPHIINA), 245, 
the British Museum, the preocular is confluent with the prefrontal on both sides. In 
another I obtained from Madras the prefrontals fail to meet one another owing to 
the forward projection frontal. 
Habitat.—All were captured along the shores between Ceylon and Penang. 
ACALY PTUs. 
ACALYPTUS PERONI (Dumeéril et Bibron). 
Acalyptus superciliosus— 
vel peroni, Duméril et Bibron, Erp. Gen. Hist. Nat., vii, p. 1340. 
Acalyptus peronii, Dumérilin Mem. Acad. Sc. Paris, 1853, xxiii, p. 522. 
Acalyptophis superciliosus, Giinther, Rept. Brit. Ind., 1864, p. 359. 
a . Jan, Tcon.'Gén., 1872, 40, pl. ii, fig. 2. 
a peroni, Boulgr., Cat., iti, 1896, p. 269. 
Fig. 59.—Acalyptus (superciliosus) beront. After Jan, Icon. Gén., 40, pl. il, fig. 2. 
I have examined three specimens only, all in the British Museum. ‘The two 
examples presented by Dr. Giinther, and the Earl of Crawford appear to me alike, but 
that presented by Dr. Fischer will, I think, prove to be a species apart. In the last 
named the costals are 19 anteriorly, 24 in midbody, and 23 posteriorly. The ventrals 
156, and narrower than the last costal row. On the other hand the two former have 
23 costal rows anteriorly, and 29 in the mid and posterior parts of the body. The 
ventrals are 195 ? aid 209, and about as broad as the last costal row. Fischer’s 
specimen is from Hong-Kong. ‘The habitat of Giinther’s is unknown, and the Earl of 
Crawford’s is from Torres Straits. I think Fischer’s specimen should be given specific 
rank, but there being only one specimen I prefer to follow Mr. Boulenger’s ruling in 
the matter. 
Description.—The head shields are studded with asperities. 
Rostral,—in contact with four shields, the portion visible above about two-thirds 
the internasal suture. Prefrontals,—touch no supralabial. Frontal,—broken up. 
Parietals,—broken up. Nasals,—touch the first and second supralabials ; nostril 
in the nasal shield, a suture runs from it to the prefrontal, and another to the second 
supralabial, so that the shield is divided into two parts. The detached fragment, how- 
ever, is obviously a part of the nasal, and not a separate shield. A similar condition 
