20 
the subject, and send you the specimen in a fresh state, but the busy routine 
of a country practitioner’s life leaves no time for the study of other than sub- 
jects of practical value in one’s everyday experience. 
Leidy seems to have had some slight misgivings as to whether the 
worm actually represented a parasite of man, but he described it as 
a new species, with the following diagnosis: 
Body long, restiform, nearly uniformly cylindrical, smooth, shining, elastic, 
tough, without evident annulation other than transverse wrinkling, with the 
anterior extremity evenly tapering in the continuous head, the end of which is 
rounded and smooth or without appendages of any kind ; the posterior extremity 
not tapering, with the caudal end incurved, bluntly rounded, without appendages 
and imperforate or without evident anal or genital aperture. Mouth a ter- 
minal pore without lips, papillae, or armature of any kind. Pharynx cylin- 
drical and opening into a straight cylindrical intestine, apparently ending in a 
blind pouch. Generative organs unobserved. Length of worm 26 inches, great- 
est thickness 1.5 mm. Width of head just behind the rounded extremity 0.375 
mm., opposite the commencement of the intestine 0.625 mm., at the middle 1.5 
mm., at the incurved caudal extremity 1.5 mm. Length of esophagus 1.125 mm. 
Leidy adds that the worm is clearly neither a Gordius nor a 
Mermis. 
Neither the figures nor the description as given by Leidy seem to 
be strongly confirmatory of the determination of Filaria. In fact, 
the description and the figure of the esophagus give rise to the ques- 
tion whether the worm may not belong to the 21ermithid3e, while the 
striation figured for the caudal end nearly establishes this point. 
Authors since 1880 have referred to F. restifonnis^ usually without 
expressing an opinion regarding the species, but Eailliet (1893a, 530) 
and Penel (1905, 8) consider that it was probably a spurious parasite. 
BiltUography. — 1880: Filaria restiformis Leidy, 1880c, 130-132, figs. 1-2 (in 
Homo; West Virginia) ; 1904a, 157-159, 278. — R. Blanchard, 1890a, 13, 
fig. 390 a-b; 1895, 785.— Braun, 1883a, 184; 1895b, 227; 1903, 3 ed., 
275. — Ijima, 1889b, 367. — Moniez, 1896, 359. — Penel, 1905, 8. — Railliet, 
1893a, 530.— Stossich, 1897, 78.— Vaullegeard, 1901, 128.— Ward, 1895, 
331; 1903, 704; 1903, 2i2. 
Reexamination of Type. 
Condition of material. — The worm is broken into several fragments 
and is not suitable to a detailed study. It was in alcohol when Doc- 
tor Carroll turned it over to me. It was next transferred to alcohol 
and glycerin; the alcohol was evaporated, and the fragments were 
studied in glycerin. Very few characters can be recognized, but 
sufficient was seen to exclude the worm from the genus Filaria. 
General contour. — By placing the various fragments together figure 
21 is obtained, showing the general apjiearance of the worm, natural I 
size. It will be noticed that while the body is of nearly unifonn i 
diameter, the head is distinctly attenuated. 
