522 
11EVIEWS. 
the purposes of their present paper, have been chiefly collections in 
the Royal and University Museums of Copenhagen, from the Danish 
Islands of St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St. J ohn, of which the principal 
contributors have been Herr Apotheker Riise, a well-known resident 
at St. Thomas’, Prof. Oersted, and Dr. Hornbeck. There are also 
specimens of Reptiles in the above mentioned Museums from the 
islands of Cuba, Haiti, Jamaica, Porto Pico, Martinique, Trinidad, 
and other smaller islands, collected and presented to these institutions 
by Dr. Riisse, Lieut. Koch and others, which have been likewise 
carefully examined. Our authors have also consulted with special 
reference to the Antillean Pauna, Dumeril and Bibron’s “ Erpe- 
tologie,” Daudin’s “Reptiles,” Ramon de la Sagra’s “Cuba,” Gosse’s 
“ Naturalist’s Sojourn in Jamaica,” Hallowell’s and Cope’s articles 
in the “ Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Phila¬ 
delphia,” and the Museum Catalogues of Dumeril, Gunther, 
Gray, and Lichtenstein. They acknowledge the probability of 
various errors in localities, but claim a general correctness for their 
catalogue of West-Indian Reptiles, so far as it is as yet known, as 
deduced from these authorities. The following table gives a summary 
of the species in each class of Reptilia, as shown by Messrs. Reinhardt 
and Lutken’s catalogue:— 
Baha¬ 
mas. 
Cuba. 
J amai- 
ca. 
Haiti. 
Porto 
Eico. 
Virgin 
Isles. 
Carab. 
Isles. 
Trini¬ 
dad. 
West 
Indies. 
Total. 
1 . 
Batrachians 
— 
4 
5 
9 
1 
4 
5 
2 
_ 
20 
2. 
Ophidians 
2 
21 
8 
13 
4 
4 
37 
17 
14 
96 
3. 
Saurian s 
3 
31 
22 
17 
3 
19 
34 
8 
10 
114 
4. 
Crocodilians 
— 
2 
1 
1 
— 
— 
3 
2 
— 
4 
5. 
Tortoises . 
1 
7 
6 
1 
1 
5 
5 
— 
. — 
14 
6 
65 
42 
41 
9 
32 
84 
29 
24 
238 
With reference to this list we must remark that the greater 
number of the species have not been personally examined by the 
authors themselves. As far as this has been done it may no doubt be 
relied upon. But such is the carelessness about localities that has 
hitherto, as we have already stated, generally prevailed; and such 
indeed is the carelessness with some naturalists, even of the present 
day in the same matter, that it must be manifest that many reptiles 
are inserted in the above list that have no real claim to a place in the 
Pauna of the Antilles. It would have been almost better perhaps if 
Messrs. Reinhardt and Lutken had altogether excluded from their list 
every species that they had not personally examined from an ascer¬ 
tained locality, for though their list would have been thus fearfully re¬ 
duced, they would have had a certain basis of truth to reason upon 
when considering the general aspects of the Reptilian-Pauna of the 
Antilles. Nevertheless it is, of course, very convenient for future 
