COUES ON GEOMYS AND THOMOMYS G. BURSARIUS. 229 
gives a number of species of each of his two genera. Twelve years subse 
quently, in 1829, Dr. Richardson discussed Rafinesque's names, coming to 
the erroneous conclusion that they both represented good genera, in one of 
which the cheek-pouches opened into the mouth, these being wholly external 
in the other. He describes several new species of Thomomys under the 
name of Geomys, supposing them te all have pendulous pouches ; gives the 
present as Geomys^ bursarius; and refers one Thomomys to Diplostoma, hav 
ing satisfied himself of the true state of the case in this instance. 
The Mus ludovicianus of Ord (1815) is a name which may be supposed 
to refer to this species, but it is probably not determinable, and in any event 
is antedated. Dr. Mitchill named the species Mus saccatus in 1821. The 
only late synonyms I have met with are oregonensis of LeConte and breviceps 
of Baird. LeConte, indeed, in his excellent sketch of the family, which placed 
the group upon a far more satisfactory footing than that it had previously occu 
pied, calls it Geomys canadensis; but this is merely the restoration of Rafi 
nesque's generic name, coupled with Lichten stein's specific one, upon the pre 
sumption that the faulty Mus bursarius of Shaw ought not to be recognized. 
Dr. LeConte's oregonensis is founded upon an animal said to be from Oregon ; 
but this locality is doubtless erroneous, for, as now well known, Townsend 
collected all the way from the Missouri westward, though his specimens fell 
in the way of being marked "Columbia River," or "Oregon," with little regard 
for actual localities where procured. The name oregonensis, besides being 
geographically erroneous in all probability (no Geomys is known to occur west 
of the Rocky Mountains), rests upon characters' not in the least incompatible 
with the now known G. bursarius. The types of G. breviceps now before 
me are all smaller than average bursarius, but within the range of variation 
of that species ; and I fail to substantiate any tangible characters by which 
this supposed species may be held to be distinct. 
The English name of " gopher,'' applied to this and other species of the 
family, is evidently a corruption of the French term "gaufre, 5 ' given by Cana 
dian voyageurs. It re-appears in German as Goffer. In the West, where 
the SpermophUi are universally called gophers by hunters and settlers, the 
species of this family are distinguished as " pocket-gophers." The application 
