Allen Generic Names of the Mephitince. 65 



wrote quatuor in lapsus for quinque.* If Coues had taken 

 Catesby's description and figure instead of Linnteus's erroneous 

 and repeatedly corrected diagnosis, it seems very improbable 

 that he would have revived Vierra putorius for a species of 

 Spilogale. 



Again, Mr. Howell says that the reason Cuvier excluded Vi- 

 verra zorilla from his Mouffettes is because Cuvier "considered 

 it to be a weasel from the Cape of Good Hope and not a skunk 

 at all." It is true, as I have before shown, that Cuvier be- 

 lieved that Viverra zorilla was a South African animal, but it is 

 also true that he had specimens of it, and probably really ex- 

 cluded it on the same grounds that lead present day naturalists 

 to exclude it from Mephitix and assign it to a separate genus 

 Spilogale, namely, the character of the skull and teeth, f So, 

 as said in my former paper, f he purposely excluded from his 

 Mouffettes the only then known species of Spilogale, thus ren- 

 dering it impossible to transfer the name Mephitis to the Spilo- 

 gale group, as Mr. Howell has attempted to do. 



Mr. HowelPs contention that Cuvier's Mustela putida is based 

 directly on Viverra putorius Linn. I am unwilling to concede, 

 but hold that its real basis is the Conepate of Buff on. The two, 

 however, have the same basis, Catesby and Kalm, but the Cone- 



*It is important to note in this connection that Sehreber, Erxleben, 

 Zimmermann, and Gmelin wrote quinque and not quatuor, and that 

 Schreber, evidently with Catesby's work before him, corrected Linnaeus 

 in quoting his diagnosis, as shown by the following literal transcript 

 from Schreber: "Viverra putorius; Viverra fusca (vielmehr nigricans), 

 lineis quatuor (oder eigentlich quinque) dorsalibus parallelis albidis. 

 LINN. Syst. [ed. 12] p. 64, n. ." Schreber, Sauget., Ill, p. 442. 



It may be further noted that Cuvier's diagnosis is evidently from 

 Gmelin and not from Linnaeus, for he says: "Noir, a cinq lignes paral- 

 leles, blanches sur le dos;" and that his "Viverra putorius L." should 

 unquestionably stand Viverra putorius Gm. It also renders it probable 

 that Cuvier's citation of "Viverra mephitis L." under his "le chinche" 

 should also read Viverra mephitis Gm., as Mr. Howell has already sug- 

 gested (N. Am. Fauna, No. 20, p. 14). 



t"Si nous verions a examineraen lui-meme 1'animal auquel Buf- 



fon a aplique" le nom de zoritte, et qu'il a repre"sente" Hist. Nat. in-4, 

 tome XIII, pi. 42 [lege xli] nous trouvons qu'il ressemble par les dents, 

 par les ongles et par la forme, comme par la grandeur, & notre putois 

 & Europe." G. Cuvier, Ann. du Mus. d'Hist. Nat., IX, 1807, p. 445. 



fBull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XIV, 1901, 330. 



