Bibliographical Notices. 59 
bifid; subcaudals 66. Posterior maxillary tooth elongate, sepa- 
rated from the others by an interspace. Upper parts uniform 
blue (in spirits), probably greenish olive in life; the lower uni- 
form white. 
Two specimens have been received,—one from Pernambuco. 
This species differs from Coronella Jegeri by its depressed head, 
by the form of its vertical shield, and by its isolated posterior 
maxillary tooth; from Xenodon typhlus by a much more slender 
habit, a specimen of the same length as one of the latter species 
having only half as large a head, X. typhlus has 140-147 
ventral shields, and no grooves on the scales. 
Length of head 4 inch, of trunk 18 inches, of tail 43 inches ; 
greatest circumference of the trunk 14: limes,—whilst the cir- 
cumference of the trunk of a X. ¢yphlus of the same total length 
(22 inches) is 23 lines. 
Tropidonotus orientalis. Pl. IX. fig. 3. 
Intermediate between T. natrix and T. hydrus. 
Scales in 19 rows, strongly keeled ; upper labials seven, the 
third and fourth entering the orbit; two anterior and three or 
four posterior oculars ; anterior frontals not pointed, rather ob- 
tuse in front. Greenish olive, with three series of black spots 
anteriorly, becoming very indistinct on the middle of the trunk; 
a black subecrescentic spot on each side of the neck, without 
yellow; posterior margins of the upper labials and a spot on the 
temple black. Belly more or less blackish. Three temporal 
shields, the anterior of which is the largest, in contact with two 
oculars. Ventral shields 152, anal bifid; subcaudals 64. 
Two specimens, an adult and a young one, were sent by 
Consul Swinhoe from Northern China, together with specimens 
of Elaphis dione. 
[To be continued. ] 
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES, 
General Outline of the Organization of the Animal Kingdom, and 
Manual of Comparative Anatomy. By Tuomas Rymer Jones, 
F.R.S., &c, &c, Third Edition, 8vo. London: Van Voorst, 
1861, 
Ir is with great pleasure that we have to announce to our readers 
the appearance of a third and greatly improved edition of Professor 
Rymer Jones’s ‘Animal Kingdom.’ The fact that a new edition 
has been so soon called for, considering the scope and character of 
the book, is of itself a sufficient evidence of its intrinsic value; and 
although, in our notice of the second edition, we felt bound to 
point out what appeared to us certain defects in the work, we were 
