1852.] 157 
1. B. nitidus, piceus, nitidissimus, thorace pallidiore, antennis pedibusque 
testaceis, elytris glaberrimis, stria suturali obsoleta notatis. Long. :18. 
Four specimens, Nova Scotia, Dr. Leidy. I am unable to discover any sexual 
character, one specimen appears to have the penultimate ventral segment of the 
abdomen a little produced over the anal segment in the middle. 
2. B. varicornis, nigro-piceus, nitidissimus, elytris parce pilosis, pedibus 
testaceis, genubus nigris, antennis basi testaceis, medio nigris, articulis 3 ultimis 
albis. Long. °15. 
One Specimen, Utica, J. C. Brevoort. The elytra are testaceous at the extreme 
apex; there is no sutural stria, but the suture is slightly elevated behind the 
middle, the setz# are very few and fine, they appear to ke arranged in three Os 
four lines. ‘The antennae are a little less slender than in the preceding species } 
the first four joints are dark testaceous, the four next are black ; the three last 
are white, the extreme apex of the last joint is piceous. 
Mr. Brevoort found this insect at the roots of some grass growing near water. 
An Attempt at a Synopsis of the Genus Geomys Raf. 
By Joun L. Le Conte, M. D. 
Having discovered in the museum of the Academy two nondescript species 
belonging to this curious genus of pouched rats, I thought that it might be useful, 
in making them known, to attempt also to bring together ina concise manner 
the characteristics of the species heretofore described. 
The collection of the Academy is fortunately so rich in this genus, that I have 
had an opportunity of inspecting more species than any author since Richardson 
first made known his numerous species. 
I would farther observe, that on account of the great rarity of specimens in the 
museums of continental Europe, the attempts in systematic works to reduce this 
genus to order have been by no means successful. 
Rightly has Richardson preferred the older name of Rafinesque to the more re- 
cent ones of Kuhl, Lichtenstein and Say; Pseudostoma, the name proposed by the 
latter, and unfortunately employed in the superb work of Audubon and Bachman 
on North American mammalia, can in no case be adopted, because, as will be 
seen below, even if the early name of Rafinesque should be dismissed on account 
of any mental obliquity displayed in other matters, the name Saccophorus, pro- 
posed by Kuhl, has fully three years priority. For the same reason Ascomys, 
proposed by Lichtenstein, and adopted by Wagner in his supplement to Schreber, 
must also be rejected, although it antedates Say’s name by one year. 
There is among many scientific men a tendency to disregard everything written 
by Rafinesque, on the plea that many of his names are hastily proposed, and 
founded upon false or imaginary characters. But surely his scientific zeal and 
laborious research deserve more attention, where their results are not obscured 
by his mental peculiarities. This view has induced me to coincide with Rich- 
ardson in restoring to this group the generic name Geomys. 
Some persons disposed to be hypercritical might object, that as s Rafinesque in 
reality established two genera, Geomys and Diplostoma, both referring to the 
same things, it isa matter of doubt which name should be adopted, and would 
therefore reject both. A simple reference to the original text will at once re- 
move this objection. The imperfection of the specimens will account for the 
*¢ no tail ”’ of Diplostoma, but no stretch of imagination can excuse the “four 
toes to all the feet,’’ and “ two long jutting and furrowed front teeth above and 
beneath.” 
The characters of Geomys, on the contrary, are correct in every particular, 
and quite sufficient to separate the genus from all-others known. 
Misled by accounts of travellers, Richardson at first divided ‘this group into 
those with external and those with internal cheek-pouches, reserving to the former 
the untenable name of Diplostoma. In his recent writings he has reviewed his 
former opinion, and now considers them as forming but one genus. 
«, 
