160 (SEPTEMBER, 
b. Cauda pilosa. 
4. G.mexicanus, mollipilosus, saturate cinereus, supra nigro-tinctus, naso 
brunneo, cauda mediocri, pilosa, versus apicem subnuda, auribus brevibus, pri- 
moribus superioribus medio profunde sulcatis. 
Length from nose to root of tail, . . 11° 
a TA, ; ‘ li 
Fore foot to end of middle claw, . . 6 é 1-7 
Hind foot to end of middle claw, . 5 ° : 1°7 
Ascomys mexicanus Lichtenstein, Abhandl. Berl. Akad..1827, 113; Brantz, 
Muiz. 27; Wagner, Schreb. Satigth. Suppl. 3, 384; Schinz, Syn. Mam. 2, 133. 
Saccophorus mexicanus Fischer, Richardson, Rep. Brit. Ass. 6, 156; Syn. 
Mam. 305; Eydoux, Voy. Favorite, 23, tab. 8. 
One specimen, Mexico, Mr. J. Speakman. Fur very fine, shining, very dark 
cinereous, above tipped with black, beneath entirely cinereous ; nose and whiskers 
brownish; breast and fore legs slightly tinted with brown. Ears short. Upper 
incisors with a very deep groove on the middle of the anterior surface. Feet 
thinly clothed with brownish hair. Tail covered with hair, which is very dense 
and long at the base, gradually becoming shorter and more scanty, leaving the tip 
almost naked. 
This specimen agrees with Lichtenstein’s and Wagner’s descriptions, except 
that the tail is not “very thinly haired ;”’ a lighter colored specimen mentioned 
in a marginal note by Wagner, had the “‘ root of the tail surrounded by a very 
short band of hair; the remaining part naked, with verticillate scales.*? So that 
this species must vary considerably in the structure of the tail, or there are 
several closely allied species confounded under the same name. The extra- 
ordinary variations mentioned by Brantz, but not seen by any other author, would 
seem to give weight to the latter opinion; the varieties are thus described :— 
‘¢@. Castaneus, infra canescens, maculis auricularibus duabus nigro-fuscis. 
‘‘1, Saturate nigro-fuscus, maculis gastrzi duabus irregularibus albis, canal- 
icul o dent. prim sup. magis laterali et externo.”? 
l have omitted the citations from Hernandez and other old and unsystematic 
authors, because I see no utility in repeating continually barbarous names, which 
were in use before natural history assumed the form of a science. 
5. G. oregonensis, mollipilosus, cinereus, castaneo-tinctus, dorso fusces- 
cente, mento, cauda brevi, pedibusque albo-pilosis, auribus brevissimis, primoribus 
superioribus bisulcatis. | . 
t Large. Small. 
Length from nose to root of tail, ° ; : 10-8 7:5 
ge Ta tT ih. ciibeh <M Ly aan he atten LeU Lh imines 38 2+3 
Fore foot to end of third claw, ° 5 : 1:5 1-2 
Hind foot to end of third claw, , : 1+2 1° 
Two specimens marked ‘ Pseudostoma bursarius, Columbia river, J. K. 
Townsend.” Another from Mr. Audubon without locality, under the same 
name. Fur fine, shining, very dark cinereous, tipped with chesnut brown, 
becoming paler beneath; hair on the middle of the back tipped with fuscous ; 
whiskers shorter than the head, whitish; chin with a large spot of whitish hair; 
feet densely clothed with white hair. Ears with a very short elevated margin. 
Upper incisors with a very deep groove at the middle, and a narrow but distinct 
one at the inner margin of the anterior face. Tail short, covered with whitish 
hair, becoming scanty at the tip.. Claws of the posterior feet rather obtuse, and 
moderately flattened. 
The hairy tail and white chin at once distinguish this species from G. canadensis. 
The color is much less red, and the middle of the back is darker. It agrees very 
closely with the figure and description of Diplostoma ? bulbivorum Richardson, 
Fauna Bor. Am. 206, pl. 18B, (the latter marked by mistake D. Douglasii,) but 
that species has no grooves on the upper incisors. 
