Viewing page 13 of 15

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

^[[True]]

[[typewritten]]
11.  PLEASE PRESENT ANY PLANS WHICH YOU MAY HAVE IN VIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT.

[[line across page]]
[[/typewritten]]

[[handwritten]]
I desire to see the Exhibition-series made more symmetrical by the addition of exotic forms, so that it may give a correct and full idea of the Class Mammalia as it now exists.  I think there should be at least one representation of each existing genus and subgenus.  The series is lacking in a great many ways at present.  The Bats are very inadequately represented and the Insectivores scarcely less so.  The odd-toed ungulates are few in number - Tapirs, Horses, etc. - Many varieties (often the sole representatives of families) such as [[underline]]Lophiomys[[/underline]] of Abyssinia, [[underline]]Cryptoprocta[[/underline]] of Madagascar, [[underline]]Dinomys[[/underline]] of Peru, [[underline]]Ailuropus[[/underline]] of Tibet, etc. etc. are wanting - Special effort should be made to obtain the larger ruminants & other ungulates before they disappear entirely.

In the study-series the deficiencies are much greater.  Five years ago there were practically no foreign mammals in the study-series.  The African collections of Abbott, Chanler, Moore, Brown and Camp help to give an idea of that Continent.  For Asia we have practically only Dr. Abbott's Kashmir collection and Adams Borneo collection.  Siberia, China, Tibet, India, the East Indies, Persia, Arabia, etc. are known only by a handful of specimens & these generally in poor condition.  There are a few Australian marsupials, & a small number of South American mammals, mostly in poor condition. [[mark to continue paragraph]] This is to be regretted, as there is no large collection of foreign mammals in the United States.  The student has no means of comparing American forms with foreign forms, and much work done here has, therefore, in a certain sense, a provincial flavor.

[[dashed line]]

(10 Cont.)

^[[Continuation of Bibliography]]
^[[Copied R.]]

[[double-underline]]True, Frederick W.[[/double-underline]] - Diagnosis of new North American mammals. < Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., XVII, pp. 241-243. (no. 999.) ^[[Advance sh. April 26 -94]]
Description of a new race of Abert's squirrel, [[underline]]Sciurus aberti concolor[[/underline]], a new genus of American moles, [[underline]]Parascalops[[/underline]], based on [[underline]]Scapanus breweri[[/underline]] (Bachman), a new species of [[underline]]Scapanus[[/underline]], [[underline]]S. dilatus[[/underline]], from Oregon, a new genus of lemming-like mice, [[underline]]Mictonys[[/underline]], and the species [[underline]]M. inniutus[[/underline]] from Labrador; also a news species of lemming, [[underline]]Myodes nigripes[[/underline]] from Alaska.

[[double-underline]]True, Frederick W.[[/double-underline]] - On the rodents of the genus [[underline]]Sminthus[[/underline]] in Kashmir.
< Ditto [[ditto for Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,]] pp. 341-343. ^[[no. 1004.]]
Points out the fact that the specimens in Dr. Abbott's collection, referred to [[underline]]S. concolor[[/underline]], should be considered distinct. They are described under the name of [[underline]]S. flavus[[/underline]].

[[double-underline]]True, Frederick W.[[/double-underline]] - Diagnosis of some undescribed Wood Rats (genus Neolonia) in the National Museum.
< Ditto [[ditto for Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,]] pp. 353-355. ^[[no. 1006. Adv. sh. June 27 -94.]]
Diagnosis of [[underline]]Neolonia splendens[[/underline]], [[underline]]N. mactrois simplex[[/underline]], [[underline]]N. venusta[[/underline]], & [[underline]]N. occidentalis fusca[[/underline]].
[[/handwritten]]

Transcription Notes:
The second sheet -- appended at the bottom -- should actually be appended to question 10, not here on 11. Is this the sort of mistake that a curator would fix in review?