306 On the Arrangement of the small Tenrecidce. 



of which, however, the majority were not retained for the 

 Museum. 



When I originally described Microgale longicaudata *, 

 two of the specimens measured, one of them the type, 

 stood out from the rest by their larger size and longer tails, 

 but they were not thought to be specifically different until 

 Dr. Forsyth Major, a few years ago, drew my attention to 

 the possibility of two species being mixed up in the series. 

 After the extraction of further skulls I find this suggestion 

 to be correct, and now name the new species in honour of 

 its first observer. The skull-measurements, however, given 

 in the original description of longicaudata are those of a 

 majori, and I therefore now publish for the first time those 

 of the real longicaudata, takeu from the type, no. 82. 3. 1. 15. 

 The latter species is evidently much the rarer of the two, as 

 only two specimens of it were collected by Mr. Cowan as 

 against thirty-seven of majori. An additional example 

 of longicaudata was obtained by Dr. Major at Amboanara in 

 1896. 



It may be of interest to record that these two long-tailed 

 species of Microgale have the end of the tail for from half 

 an inch to an inch naked and transversely wrinkled on its 

 upper surface, just as in certain prehensile-tailed Muridae. 

 This character, and also the more lengthened fifth hind toe 

 of the same species, indicates that these forms are arboreal, 

 being the only Insectivora — other than the Tupaiidae — 

 "which are so. Nor is any other truly prehensile tail known 

 in the order. 



3. Leptogale, g. n. 



Genotype. L. gracilis (Oryzoiycles gracilis, Maj.). 



A remarkably slender-skulled form, with quite a number 

 of special characteristics. The peculiar long narrow muzzle 

 and small subequal widely spaced teeth, and the suppression 

 in the molars of the prominent internal lobe so marked in 

 other forms, render this one of the most isolated members of 

 the group. 



Dr. Major's brief preliminary account of it indicates that 

 he appreciated its nearer relationship to Microgale than to 

 Oryzorictes, and his use of the latter name was only due to 

 his then thinking it possible that the two genera would 

 grade into one another, and he therefore used the earlier 



* J. Linn. Soc, Zool. xvi. p. 319 (1882). 



