APPENDIX: NO. XXXVI. gi 
Now there appears nothing in this description which will distin- 
guish the Triton Bibronii from specimens of Triton cristatus found 
under stones or in other situations removed from water, or which 
have not long returned to the ponds in which they breed. It is the 
more remarkable that Mr. Bell should not recognize this fact, 
as he has confessed the error into whieh he fell with respect to 
L. punctatus, a species in his former edition distinguished from his 
L. palmipes by the very same character of the straight lip, so that 
the vignette which formerly [ed. 1, p. 138] was intended to point 
out the distinction between L. punctatus and L. palmipes now serves 
[ed. 2, p. 151] to show the seasonal appearances of the first species. 
This vignette so similar to the one devoted to the heads of 7. Bibronii 
and T. cristatus [ed. 1, p. 181; ed. 2, p. 142], must have suggested 
to our author the probability of a similar error in both cases. But we 
respect the feeling which may have prevented him from withdrawing 
a species whose name he had “chosen as a proper compliment to 
the first of Erpetologists, and one of the most amiable of men.” 
He acknowledges that with respect to L. punctatus and L. palmipes 
he was “led into error, by trusting that the accuracy of his 
lamented friend Bibron was absolutely infallible” [ed. 2, p. 155] ; 
but that he should announce at the same time a second error of no 
less importance, from the same source, would have been too much 
for us to expect : nevertheless, it appears that Mr. Bell corrected the 
judgment of M. Bibron in this matter. M. Bibron declared a 
bottled specimen which he found in the collection of the Zoological 
Society was 7. marmoratus of Latreille. Mr. Bell having his 
attention called to it, said, “‘It is neither 7° cristatus nor T. mar- 
moratus, but shail be named T. Bibroni.’ In examining these, and 
many other kinds of animals and plants, species are only to be 
identified by a long study of individuals in every age, sex, season 
and situation. Iam confirmed in the opinion I have expressed with 
respect to 7’. Bibronii by the experience of a gentleman living in the 
midland counties [Mr. Higginbottom], who has devoted the most 
careful attention to the British Newts. I believe I am correct in 
stating that he has hitherto, in that district of England, only met 
with the two species 7’. cristatus and T. punctatus. At the same time 
it is very possible that in other parts of the country there may be 
other species, as we know there is L. paimipes: all we say is, that if 
T. Bibronii be really distinct, we wish Mr. Bell had given characters 
by which we may recognize it. 
Salamandra palmipes, Daudin.—Without wishing to criticise too 
much the very pretty and useful work of Mr. Bell, I cannot refrain 
from remarking that the figure‘ of the female “ L. palmipes,” of the 
new edition, is not at all characteristic. It would rather represent 
L. punctatus, from which indeed the female L. palnupes is not always 
1 (The figure shews six toes on the hind foot, as already pointed out by 
Mr. Newman (Zool. 2576); but though Mr. Wolley must have uoticed this 
defect, he evidently did not think it expedient to refer to it here.—Ep. | 
c2 
