386 Mr. G. A. Boulenger on 



was shown in the transverse section (1 a) given in our plate, 

 and which led Eichwald to adopt the term Laceripora for 

 his genus. The structures described by us as "incipient 

 divisions of the cells " are thus accounted for. 



Dr. Lindstrom's later views, as quoted in our paper, are 

 therefore quite acceptable, viz. that Laceripora should be 

 retained as a distinct genus of the Favositidse ; and in this 

 opinion Dr. H. A. Nicholson also concurs. 



XXXVI. — Remarks on Mr. C. W. Be Viss recent Gontri- 

 hutions to the Herpetology of Australia^. By G. A. 

 BOULENGEE. 



It is painful to have to record such contributions as Mr. 

 De Vis's herpetological papers, but it is a duty for the 

 working zoologist, who constantly complains of the plague 

 of synonymy, not to allow them to pass without protest. 

 Their author is no doubt stimulated by the desire of promoting 

 herpetological knowledge in his country, but, through his 

 incompetence and want of care, he will do much harm. As 

 regards certain groups of Reptiles he may, in defence, 

 point to the great difficulties attending these studies owing 

 to the absence of general treatises ; but when he has in his 

 hands the recent ' Catalogue of Batrachians in the British 

 Museum,' and is not even able to distinguish a Rana from a 

 Hyla^ or to recognize so striking a form as Mixophycs, he has 

 no excuse, and one can only wonder at his daring to write on 

 subjects of which he is so manifestly ignorant. 



The papers in question contain descriptions of no less 

 than thirty new species, several of which are made the 

 types of new genera. I have no time at present to go through 

 the whole of them, and must restrict my remarks to the groups 

 which I have fully worked out, viz. the Batrachians and the 

 Lizard-families Geckonidee and Agamidse. Mr. De Vis's 

 additions to those groups amount to fifteen new species, which 

 are enumerated below. Of these, three appear to deserve 

 recognition, one is doubtful, the rest are synonyms of species 

 previously named. 



1. Limnodynastes Uneatus (Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. W. ix. 

 1884, p. 65) = L, Peronii (D. & B.). 



* Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. Wales, ix. 1884, and Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensl. 

 i, 1884-85. 



