124 



1. 2. 3. 



in. lin. in. lin. in. lin. 







H 







3| 







2+ 







4 



1 



H 



1 



9 



3 



6 



3 



6 



2 



3 



2 



1 







4 







4 







9 







8f 







5 







4* 



4 







13 



6 



Length of the ears 3^ 



of the tragus 2^ 



of the fore-arm 1 10 



of the longest finger . . 3 6 



of the fourth finger. ... 2 2 



of the thumb 3^ 



of the tibia 9 



of the foot and claws . . 5 



Expanse of wings 13 10 



3. M. TRISTIS. 



Vespertilio tristis, Waterhouse, Proc. Zool. Soc. pt. xiii. p. 3, 

 1845 ; Gray, Zool. Voy. Samar. p. 31, 1849. 



The muzzle of this species is relatively broader and more obtuse 

 than in any other species of the genus ; and this peculiarity, together 

 with its superior size, is sufficient at once to distinguish it from the 

 last species, which it otherwise resembles. The peculiarity pointed 

 out by Mr. Waterhouse of having the nostrils directed sublaterally, 

 whilst in the allied species M. blepotis they open almost in front, 

 does not, I think, furnish a very valuable character in any of the 

 species which have the glands of the upper lips much developed. 

 When these glands are large, they often advance so far forward as to 

 thrust the outer margins of the nostrils forward also, or at any rate 

 to close up the vertical notch already mentioned as separating the 

 lips from the nostrils. This gives the latter the appearance of open- 

 ing directly in front ; whereas the same species, when examined in a 

 dry state, when the lips have shrunk and produced a more pointed 

 muzzle and prominent nostrils, the latter are found to open more or 

 less laterally. And as it is not uncommon to meet with different 

 individuals of the same species (in this genus) having these glands 

 developed in a slightly different degree, so it is common to observe 

 a corresponding difference in the nostrils. A good number of 

 examples will alone supply the necessary materials by which to 

 distinguish truthfully the characters of allied species. It remains 

 therefore, as I think, to be proved by the examination of a greater 

 number of examples, that this species differs essentially in what 

 may be called a generic peculiarity from the so-called Vesp. Es- 

 choltzii, or that the latter differs from the Vesp. blepotis of M. 

 Temminck. 



I can detect no difference in the distribution or quality of the fur 

 from the species last described. It is unicoloured, and the general 

 colour is very deep brown, as in the Australian specimens of M. 

 blepotis. When seen in spirit, it appears to be sooty black. 



As far as is at present known, this species is confined to the Phi- 

 lippine Islands. 



