50 Mr. A. Dendy on the History of the 



to a distinct subspecies. That modern Americau zoologists 

 ■would probably separate this local form as a distinct species 

 I am quite aware ; but such a procedure would, as in other 

 cases, have the great disadvantage of suppressing all signs of 

 the evident relationship existing between the two forms, 

 without gaining any greater local exactness than may be 

 obtained by the free use of trinomial nomenchature. 



Sci'urns Aherti durangi^ subsp. n. 



Size and general characters of S. A. tijpicus *. Sides of 

 nose from muzzle to eye rufous, as opposed to the " grey 

 cheeks " of typicus ; a ring round eye paler rufous. Ears 

 entirely without tufts (type killed in middle of October) ; no 

 chestnut or rufous spots round or behind their bases. Hairs 

 of chest and belly slaty grey basally, as compared to " pure 

 white " in typicus. Wliolc under surface of tail inwards of 

 the submarginal black band coarsely grizzled grey, each hair 

 being broadly banded with black and white; in typicus the 

 under surface of the tail is *' wholly white." Median part of 

 dorsal surface of metatarsus dark-coloured, proximally like 

 the lower leg, terminally with a rufous tinge ; inner side of 

 metatarsus and tops of toes white. Descriptions of typicus 

 simply say '•' feet white." 



Hah. Ciudad, Durango, Central Mexico; alt. 8100 feet, 

 on the Sierra Madre. 



Type B. M. 82. 3. 20. 16. Female, killed Oct. 14, 1881 ; 

 a second specimen killed Aug. 7. Coll. A. Forrer. 



XI. — Note on the History of the so-called Family Teichonidse. 

 By Aethur Dendy, D.Sc, F.L.S., Melbourne University. 



In reply to my note on " The Discovery of the True Nature 

 of the so-called Family Teichonidaj," published in the 

 ' Zoologischer Anzeiger ' (no. 395), Dr. R. von Lendenfeld, in 

 no. 402 of the same journal, endeavours to prove that he 



* It appears to me equally simple and exact, wliile far more eiiphouious, 

 to use the word typicus for the typical subspecies, instead of doubling tlie 

 specific name, as is commonlj^ done. The original author's name slionld 

 of course be appended after ti/picus. The ugly sound of a double specific 

 name is always bad enough ; but if that method is adhered to, we may in 

 some cases have to employ three repetitions of the same word, e. [/. Lutva 

 lutra Intra, Linn., instead of (if like generic and specific are admitted) 

 Lxdra Intra typica, L., or, most euphonious of all, Lutra miJgaris typica, 

 Erxl. This possibility of a treble repetition may well make us hesitate 

 before insisting on the same word being used for both species and typical 

 subspecies 



