924 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XX. No. 5^2. 



bon and Bachman (1843) with reference to 

 the actions of a badger in captivity, in part 

 as follows : 



We occasionally saw him assume rather an in- 

 teresting attitude, raising the fore part of his 

 body from the earth, drawing -liis feet along his 

 sides, sitting up in the manner of the marmot, 

 and turning his head in all directions to make 

 observations. 



The author (Dr. Coues) continues: 



The assuming of this attitude may have been 



a result of confinement, as I have not observed it 



when I have seen the animal in a state of nature, 



nor does it appear to have been noticed by others. 



While acting as the geologist of Captain 

 Wm. A. Jones's Expedition through the Yel- 

 lowstone Park, in 1873, I was enabled to 

 make a few desultory notes concerning the 

 wild animals, a list of which was published 

 in the American Naturalist in February, 1874. 

 On a little trip back over our trail along 

 Yellowstone River and Pelican Creek, I 

 passed through two or three of our deserted 

 camps. Near one of these, my assistant shot 

 a fine specimen of Lepus iairdti, Hayden,* 

 which upon dissection proved to be a male, 

 to my astonishment giving evidence of hav- 

 ing recently suckled its young. The discov- 

 ery of this interesting fact relating to this 

 species had been made, with abundant evi- 

 dence, by Dr. Merriam in the same region 

 the preceding year, but this had not been 

 made public at the time.f 



At dusk, as we were preparing to camp 

 near the lower end of Yellowstone Lake, we 

 started up a badger which ran from us with 

 its peculiar cross-legged, sidling lope until 

 nearly out of range of rifle shot, when it 

 suddenly turned, rose to a sitting posture, 

 stroked its fore legs down along its side, eye- 

 ing us in very much the same manner as is 

 customary with the marmot, remaining thus 

 until I had discharged my carbine by a shot 



* U. S. Geol. Surv. of Wyoming, etc., Hayden 

 6th Annual Report, 1872. 



tin the article mentioned above {Amer. Naf., 

 1874 ) , I remarked that Lepus hairdii had not been 

 met by me. This was because I had not then 

 seen a description and so did not properly identify 

 it at the time. 



which struck the ground far enough in front 

 to ensure his safety. Upon this he retreated 

 some distance, repeating the performance 

 several times as I advanced towards him, but 

 not again remaining within gun-shot distance. 

 This animal did not move ofE in a direct line, 

 but pursued a tortuous course as it ran, very 

 much as if he were attempting to dodge a 

 pursuer gifted with greater powers of speed. 

 Moreover, the general course lay along an 

 open swale somewhat transverse to our line 

 of approach. His whole demeanor was wary 

 in the extreme, and fully sustained his repu- 

 tation as a ' badger.' 



Theo. B. Comstock. 

 Los Angeles, Cal., 

 October 10. 1904. 



SPECIAL ARTICLES. 

 AMPHIBIA VERSUS BATRACHIA. 



The question as to the proper systematic 

 name of the class of vertebrates containing 

 the frogs, toads, salamanders, etc., has been 

 discussed in this journal several years ago by 

 competent authorities with the result that the 

 disputants agreed to disagree as they had 

 done before. The conflicting arguments may 

 be briefly stated as follows : Ainphihia is the 

 proper term, because it is the oldest class 

 term, while on the other side it was contended 

 that Batrachia is the only tenable name, since 

 it is the appellation first given to the group 

 having a compass essentially identical with 

 the limits of the class in its modern accept- 

 ance. It is true that Batrachia was given to 

 the group only as an order, but it was con- 

 tended — and I believe correctly so — that it is 

 more essential that the selection of names for 

 groups higher than genera should be guided 

 by their contents rather than by their rank. 

 The law of priority, as distinctly specified by 

 the American Ornithologists' Union code of 

 nomenclature does not apply to these higher 

 group names. 



Those who accepted the name Batrachia did 

 it under the universal impression that the first 

 application of this term dated from Brong- 

 niart's use of the French form Batraciens in 

 1800, latinized in 1802 by Macartney into 

 Batrachia. The order so designated corre- 



