832 The American Naturalist. [September, 
Description.—Size large, somewhat less than largest S. californicus. 
Tail about length of head and body, stout, and scantily covered with 
coarse hairs; terminal pencil inappreciable. Hind feet smaller than 
in californicus. Ears large, more rounded and thinly-haired than in cali- 
fornicus. Color pale, grayish buff on upper parts, becoming brownish 
on rump and lacking any darker dorsalstripe. Sides, from eyes to root 
of tail, more buffy than upper parts, but no definite lateral stripe.. 
Lower parts uniform grayish white, lacking buffy or plumbeoustints on 
throat and ventral region wins present in californicus. A narrow, 
black, ring encircles each e 
Measurements.'— Total Mod: 193.5; tail, 98.5; hind foot, 22.5. 
Skull—total length, 28.5; basilar length, 20.5; zvgomatie breadth, 
13.8; length of nasals, 10.5; interorbital constriction, 4.3. 
Another specimen, a female, taken at the same date and place, has 
lost half the tail during life. In no other respect does she differ from 
the type, the length of the head and body and of the feet being the 
same in both. 
In size, form, dentition and relative measurements the skull of major 
differs inappreciably from its near ally, californicus. The resem- 
blance of major to Baird’s description of * Hesperomys boylii” and its 
apparent affinities with californicus inclined me to the belief that it 
was his “ Long-tailed Mouse,” and that it should be classed a sub-spe- 
cies of californicus as S. californicus boylii. Dr. Allen, who has ex- 
amined the type of boylii, and to whom I submitted the two specimens 
of major for an opinion on this question, thinks their identity very 
doubtful, though admitting their apparent resemblance in size and col- . 
oration ; neither does he consider the relationship of major to californi- 
eus at all close. Independently of this verdict I should have hesitated 
to give major full specific rank. 
I am informed that Dr. Merriam has secured a series of Sitomys 
from the type locality of boylii in Eldorado Co., which will enable him 
shortly to re-describe that species and settle a much involved question 
in the synonomy of this very puzzling genus. 
2. Sitomys herroni?? Sp. nov. (Type No. 815, 9 , Col. of S. N. Rhoads, 
San Bernardino Valley, Cal., March 3, 1893, col. by R. B. Herron.) 
Description.— Body short and stout ; ears large, very thinly and min- 
utely haired. Tail very long and slender (one-third longer than head 
! All measurements given in this paper are in millimeters, and were made by collec- 
tor before skinning. 
2 For Mr. R. B. Herron, whose abilities as 
more than deserves public recognition. 
3 È Le 28.1.4 
= Ly > 
collector 
collector 
