1870.] Proceedings of the Asiatic Society. 75 



drawings that I had previously found Wynaademis in the same 

 district. These small Gymnodactyli resemble each other very closely, 

 and possibly one of them may on comparison be found identical with 

 G. Jerdoni, described by Theobald in his catalogue. Major B. 

 has ascertained that G. indiais, Gray, described from specimens 

 sent home by myself has generally an unequal number of pores on 

 one side than on the other side. A very curious new form has been 

 described by B e d d o m e, from the Tripatty hills in North Arcot, as 

 Calodactylus aureus. The Gecko has the ends of the toes dilated into 

 large disks, (vide Madras Med. Journ. 1870, No. 1, p. 30, pi. II). 



My G. littoralis has hitherto not occurred to Major B e d d o m e> 

 or any of his collectors, but, I have little doubt, will yet reward their 

 labours. It is very distinct from any of the other small Geckos, having 

 the basal plates of the toes much dilated, — especially the most 

 anterior one which is double the size of the others and somewhat 

 nail-shaped ; beyond this the apical portion of the phalanges are 

 composed of small narrow plates all terminating in nails. The sub- 

 caudal scutse are large. 



I have recently obtained what appears to be a fine new species 

 of Pentadactylus of Giinther from the Khasi hills. This I shall 

 call P. Khasiensis. It has numerous larger rounded tubercles mixed 

 with the very small scales of the back. The nostrils are situated 

 between the rostral, 1st labial and a supranasal, and are followed by 

 several small scales. There are 10 upper lpJnals, the last long and 

 somewhat undulating on its upper edge, and 11 lower labials. 

 The body above is covered with about three series of elongated 

 spots, which become two at base of tail, and finally unite into one. 

 It is a large species. 



I possess one or two specimens of Nycteridium Schneideri from the 

 Khasi hills ; rare apparently so far north, though it is mentioned by 

 G ii n t h e r from Assam and Bengal. The only other novelty to 

 mention in this family is a species of JEublepharis which appears 

 distinct from both Hardwikii and macularius, a species not in 

 G ii n t h e r, but recorded in Theobald's Catologue. Unfortu- 

 nately it is only a young specimen and imperfect. I got it in Hurriana 

 and shall provisionally call it JEublepharis fasciatus. It has the lar- 

 ger tubercles of the back larger and finer than in macularius, and 



