68 Mr. Barnes on the Doubtful Reptils. 



tion as a fish does its gills. In bringing them down to the 

 neck, the filaments are brought pretty close to the fleshy 

 branchiae, on elevating them the fimbria? dilate and float, as 

 it were, in the water, presenting, from the beauty of their co- 

 lor and gracefulness of their motion, an appearance beauti- 

 ful beyond description. The largest specimen was thir- 

 teen inches in length, the least about eight. ***** 

 I would notice that in the figure in the Annals of the Lyceum, 

 the head is sharper, that is, the snout is narrower than in 

 those which I have. The general appearance indicates a 

 more active animal than the appearance and movements of 

 my specimens would authorize. 



On dissecting one of them precisely thirty-eight vertebers 

 were discovered, nineteen of which belong to the back and 

 neck. I notice this particularly from your having dwelt on it 

 in your interesting paper. Professor Sweetser of the Medi- 

 cal school dissected it for me. 



There is no indication of the vitta from which the specific 

 name was given. It seems to me that if that character is not 

 general it would be well to change the name. 



With much respect yours, 



Geo. W. Benedict. 



The letter from which the foregoing extract was taken, was 

 written with a modest apology that it might possibly interest 

 me, and was not intended for publication ; but as it contains 

 important information which the scientific world ought to pos- 

 sess, I know the author's goodness will pardon me for giving 

 it the present direction. 



Here then we have authentic information, from a source 

 that will put the subject beyond a doubt. Schneider's animal 

 came from Lake Champlain. Here seven are caught in one 

 night. Schneider's animal was discredited, and believed to 

 have been mutilated. Here two Professors of the University 

 watch the motions of the living animals for several days, and 

 then dissect one of the largest, which in every material point 

 exactly coincides with the published description of the Pro- 

 teus Lateralis. On the subject of the name I agree with 

 Professor Benedict, that it should be changed. Dr. Mitchill 

 has latterly called it Proteus Maculatus, which, as it is a 

 good descriptive name and comes from the right source, I am 

 disposed to adopt. (See vol. xi. p. 287.) 



