On some Mammals from Kimherley , Australia. 149 



his death, his Editor) had no specimen, and merely reproduced 

 in a German translation the original Latin description in 

 Gmelin's edition ; this description is acknowledged by hitn 

 as bein<^ taken from " Linnseus" (p. 210). 



Gmelin''s E. exiJiens is at present known from the Tropical 

 Atlantic only ; in fact, from the type alone. I am unable 

 to identify it with any of the species, as distinguished by 

 Valenciennes, Brown Goode, Jordan and his fellow-labourers. 

 The question whether a high dorsal fin with convex upper 

 margin (as observed in our specimen) is invariably, or only 

 in a part of the species of Exoccetas^ a sign of youth, has not 

 yet been satisfactorily settled. But there remains the back- 

 ward position of the anal fin : a character which precludes 

 the idea of associating our specimen with E. rondelelii, 

 lamellifer, or the E. exsiliens of Jordan and Evermann. In 

 this respect it comes nearest to E. katoptron (Bleek.*), 

 E. robustus (Gthr.), and E. altipinnis (0. V.). In fact, 1 

 should be inclined to regard the last, which was obtained in 

 the Indian Ocean and near the Cape of Good Hope, as a 

 synonym of E. exUiens (L. Gm.), if Valenciennes did not 

 ascribe to it twelve rays in the anal fin. On the other hand, 

 the figure which he gives of this fish shows eight or nine 

 onlyt- Finally, the fish from Wood^s Hole, which Jordan 

 and Evermann continue to figure as late as 1905 (' Hawaii 

 Shore-Fishes,'' p. 133, fig. 45) as Exoccetus volitans^maLj well 

 prove to be a more advanced stage of growth of Exoccetus 

 exih'ens (L. Gm.). 



XIX. — Some Mammals from N.E. Kimherley , Northern 

 Australia. By Oldfield Thomas. 



The British Museum has acquired from Mr. J. P. Rogers a 

 few mammals collected by him on Parry's Creek, near 

 Wyndham, N.E. Kimberley, and these prove to be of sucii 

 interest as to deserve a short account. Of the six species 

 represented three need new names. 



It is interesting to notice that there seems to be a greater 



* In Bleeker's figure of this species the ventral fins are represented 

 much too short ; they were mutilated in the single specimen which he 

 had and which is now in the British Museum. 



t I am indebted to Dr. Pellegrin, who at my request examined tlie 

 types of E. altipinnis, for the information (received while this paper was 

 passing through the press) that Valenciennes had correctly counted the 

 anal rays, but that the figure was in this respect incorrect. 



