CAMBARUS. iol 
of the previously described species were examined by Dr. Hagen in the 
course of the preparation of his monograph; viz. C. Clarkii Gir., C. propin- 
quus Gir., C. montanus Gir., C. rusticus Gir., C. longulus Gir., C. Bartonii (Fab.), 
and C. affinis (Say). Hagen proved the correctness of Girard’s determi- 
nation of Fabricius’s and Say’s species. Of Girard’s new species, C. montanus 
appeared identical with C. Barton, and C. longulus was deemed by Hagen 
to be an accidental variety of C. Bartomi. A thorough search for Girard’s 
types in the Smithsonian Institution made by myself in December, 1882, 
discovered one more species, C. Peale’, which proved to be large speci- 
mens, male and female, of C. afiius (Say). These (and Astacus Gambelii 
in the Philadelphia collection) are the only types of Girard’s species now 
existing. 
There are, however, in the Museum of the Academy of Natural Sci- 
ences of Philadelphia eight species labelled with Girard’s names (followed 
in most cases by a question-mark) aud the localities quoted by Girard. These 
specimens may be considered of almost equal authority with type speci- 
mens. They are the followmg: C. Pealed? C. rusticus ? C.montanus ? C. propin- 
quus 2 C. acutissmus ? C. Diogenes 2 C. robustus, and C. Blandingw. C. Pealei ? 
is the same as the typical C. Peale in the Smithsonian Institution (= C. affi- 
ns). C. rusticus? and C. montanus ? are identical with the types of the same 
name examined by Hagen. “C. propinquus ? Garrison’s Creek, Sackett’s 
Harbor,” is C. obesus Hag. and “C. Diogenes ? District of Columbia,’ is 
C. propinquus as determined from the type examined by Hagen. That an 
accidental transposition of labels has here taken place is evident from the 
localities given on the labels (C. propinquus is not found in the District of 
Columbia), and from the account of the characteristic habits and coloration 
of C. Diogenes given by Girard. Through this misplacement of labels, and 
through his ignorance of the peculiar habits of the “chimney crayfish,” 
Hagen failed to see the identity of his own @. obesus and Girard’s C. Diogenes. 
C. aculissimus ? is the young of C. acutus; C. robustus may be considered a 
variety of C. Bartonii ; C. Blandingii is not Harlan’s species, but the one after- 
wards deseribed by Le Conte as A. troglodytes. There remain in Girard’s list, 
to be determined without the aid of types or authoritative specimens, the 
following : C. acutus Gir., C. pellucidus (Tellk.), C. Carolinus Erichs., C. pusillus 
(Raf.), C. Nebrascensis Gir. C. pusillus, whether it be the same as Rafinesque’s 
species or no, is probably a small form of C. Bartowi ; C. Nebrascensis, I think, 
may be a variety of C. Diogenes. 
