: ls diye = oa = o =
4 a < <
= = Sc
4 ° = a “ e =
>) os “ol Oo _ (e) = (e)
= el =z ~ = i ee | =a
NOILLNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3!IYVYUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUTION
: Ets z s Me ie '
= wo = ow ae My o =
5 nd 5 2 =" ‘ My, 2 5
: “ nS hF -
fF w
Z He sok z 4 - zZ

LIBRARI ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYSIT
z o” i ” z= 7) A. z
< = < = : < S 3
5 = 5 NS + ‘, S = y 6
D o ” WE. Ww leks, 7) . Gi
e re) — RIN) = Oo =
= = E Y \S = = a =
= > = \ > = Pak =
Dn Zz ” ae Za 79) za ~

_ NVINOSHLIWS S3IYVYUEIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
D aie if Z 7 2 a
= = XY =< 2. < ; ny a
x — xn \ oC 4 a = a
m rst > a 5 m. a fae
7 Zz v. aa z ar = a

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYSIT
S = ® Zz i z F
ia = Bd = wo = 0
a ae a 5 2 = 2
> Ke % > Pe = 2
2 =h = = 2 = je
ea ” m ” m 79) r
? NOLLALILSNI Sai eal B an i
i a ms = Boe | EO gon Seine NST tea
= es = ae NS = = ;
=r] ae can | z= WS vt =a — =
a es oO x. OD Wee, & < (@) 2
a ct oe t We re) 2 ¢
2 = < = x = = -
= FS S a . 2 = .

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31YVYsII

LIBRARIES
s =

Biomwt @ POP )t eA

LIBRARIES

S3lu¥vudIT LIBRARIES INSTITUTION -

5

NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLIWS

g!7 LIBRARIES

a. Sh LT OU.

NS
Se

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

INSTITUTION NOILNILILSNI
INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI
INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI

saiuvadl
S3lyvyugl

$3

NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3luvudlt

AN

NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
Vt

YG,
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLIWS

“SS

NOILNLILSNI NV S3IYVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

LIBRARIES SMITHSONI

RARIES

NOILALILSNI
NOILNLILSNI

1] LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN

oa

INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI
Pa

SN NOILMLILSNI
17 LIBRARIES

oy ae SD =

NVINOSHLINS S31uvua 7
BA oe ar .

17
DN
IN

es

LIBRAR.
LIBRAR
NOILN LI

soP

ILILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IY¥VYdIT LIBRARIES INSTITUTION NOIL

5

ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

INSTITUTION NOILALIL
INSTITUTION NOILNLI4
S3IYVUGIT LIBRAR

Saluvydl
S3luvagiy
INSTITUTION

NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uvVudiIi_ LIB

‘"

NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
tt £3
Gig
NVINOSHLINS
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
cate

SS
LLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3JIYVYUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOI

: u & @ :
a = al w = o
4 x ‘
= ve = am = -
5 . 5 2) 5 :
ie ad ae a) =z 4
ARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS Salavadi7 tle
z a = i z _
= Ted = wo © ow
>. 25] > oe a
Ee: > - rae Pea a
2 m 2 - b :
= o = o . €& n
NLILSNI_ NVINOSHLIWS | S3 iuvuad Tl BRARIES, SMITHSONIAN ah NOI.
= ~ if fy = WS a = =e
a DB hig 9 \ Ss OE 5 x %
: ” >
‘ = = = ys 2 = a = 1B
RAR I ES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION | NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS Saluvugi7_-
= w”
ud A lu = Wd iS
a a a = a =
* ar 4
<x 3; = < = ; <x os
a 5 isa) =- faa) Oo
= _ (@) _ >
oa z - za a
S3!1uYVYdIT LIBRARIES INSTITUTION _ NOI.
ie ra hae z= ms
oe e) — re) sa o
. - pd = =
= NE : : = E
a A “NS eK ae a td fad
Le : 2 : :
ARIES | SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILMLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS, S3 fuvudI7_ LIB
Z Sui A ill ee = Gm 2 .
SG = 5S NW : 2B =. S
AX 3 ie . wae Tr ge
WY S x 8 SN ° x So =
s = = \ SN 2 = Z| =
N 2 hes > = > =
“ 2 w = NOI.
NLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYGIT_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUTION |
= tu < ne ; z WwW
<= ” St Loe ap) =
= . _< 73, < eo: + <
c ke ow Cc ow ‘IiG7 CS a
= aN fea) =f oOo.” ue = faa)
AO he S 5 2 >
ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLIWS saiuvugia LIB
“ASO © = SSO = re is Py oa = a ae A

i?
LY

—

ft bey
NF Ay

~ at

pelea cits VISION OF HERPETOLOGY

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION.
UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM.

~~.

THE POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA.

LEONHARD STEJNEGER,

Curator of the Depariment of Reptiles and Batrachians,

From the Report of the U.S. National Museum for 1893, pages 337-487.
with plates 1-19, end figures 1-70.

WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.
1895.

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION.
UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM.

BY

LEONHARD STEJNEGER,

Curator of the Department of Reptiles and Batrachians

From the Report of the U.S. National Museum for 1893, pages 337-487.
with plates 1-19, and figures 1-70.

WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.

1895.

THE POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA.

BY

LEONHARD STEJNEGER,

Curator, Department of Reptiles and Batrachians, U. S. National Museum.

H. Mis. 184, pt. 2——22 337

CONTENTS.

(USEC SLETE POAT ST eI i na SA Ls) af ee a
epee EVEN aria A ee che Sheed elw tc kne seg wale ns
ithe so-called “harmless ” poisonous snakes:-...-. 2. 2.62. 22) soc cee cee nee
ME AIMUbTOM OL POIONOUSSNAKES 40. Soon ece 2-62. cco can beta vax veven=se-
UST OOD SEW EIS) PRIOR Ga eeS GHEE Ae See nee eee oe Po ree
(COPTER OLS ea Per Si 3 Sa ee as ere Sey ete oe te ee
Esperiments: by Eeracca‘and Deregibus: 0.2.2 225262 cee. 55205 sens se oe
PURI Benet crate a oe eh Ps Pa et salah ta cla Sebo sca weld Dk S wate Wiese’ ©
C9 ERIE Eco Re a ES RI 7 See er a ae ee
Pepe ih anetee i Laer eek Vac ae oaias Sa wieGe A Seas Woe hSswemsie oeee
Ruemann s investigation Of the glands. -..2--:-.:---. -222...ec-cass eee od
QUCICIIIS, GETING DS SSSR a Wetec sc Crt Eta gee ae eae ee ea a ee ea
Is it essential for a venomous snake to possess grooved fangs..-.-.-.-..---
Synopsis of the Opisthogly ph snakes occurring in the United States. Boon
MneWonrwlisnakes—tamily Blapid@....---- 2.2252 2-a-m 20 scts tees scex scte ees.
Anesibeworal snakes; POISONOUS. 22... 2-5 2<222-705 2252 sos sede = sabe be see oc
Mimicry and contusion with other snakes ..-2..--:-... 2s). -..:22-2.e2.22
ASEM SEM VANS asia soe eis Zt ay. oe stise ee ea ehse Seles tu V2 dha Secs
Mr. F. W. True’s account of a celebrated case of coral mane biter.ses8' 5:
‘QuINGID CARS GG Ae Com OIG SES Saree ently geese tae arenes eT ge ge temp eS ae
BecOmcOralnsnakeis; Can geTO Uses a=.sc- fe einer eben ace sates se sees eee Se Se
Ale Setusmalin ess Of mombh erroneous 2-252 s82a55 see asee -- 5). oe sc ete ace oe
ATLA Ota hems apsrtone Cobtass.o-ccee meee eal cecis ck Soe oe Se esek set
Comparison between the Elaps and its harmless imitators............----
Natural history of the Elapidw occurring in the United States ...........
(COGIINS JBURIOT Seis ee ROO OR BES SE oa Ee gen Sen alee mr Re See
| SELES TCR Nie oa Ss Se ee ee eh neat ee See
Synopsis of species in the United States ....-...................-...
MALLE MIN SHAC— EADS fWNUs. oe en oe Sas oe Soe ede eu ot See Soc
PAVIOON MNO, 5S see Hs oe Sie See Sein ieee gee Pee ce eee ee
I PIGHDR Ie Sau Sos See as Sao a OS ea a eae CS ee ene err ee ae
DERG OUNOM. kas, See Say RAGES A ae ae eee ee eee, cena a ee
WEHIRUROM 3555 08 2655 sSo Dee a ote. eM eeSeee e = ee
ems tH Mele MISEEMOM PION 50 fas= asco unease puelivece ss Yee bctibesciss
Tuts mere eenrters tate ron eigen tlaley (ome cles ie Eel bed dys Sa een 2 <
Sonoran Coral Snake—Zlaps euryxanthus .........--------------------0--
SUID INY SE DEG Ge Se eee ee Be Bee ie Soe eee ee een ee ee
DESC Tait OTe mee ces A eee Nees clr seeleuieiis—aaca ve kvews
GeoorAphHical CiscMbUmMOnwe. fe weweee 2202 cok oce sce lessebe cess scd ewes
PAROS Mia VEners—tainulivn GROLMO Ceres oatite = ccs oo se Ubi sSeee. keacse estes 2s
UM xe) BO TeT ES Sas Oo. ee ee ae
(QTM, OTE SPIN AN ASTSIS eS Lek eaten et) ca a CRS Ry ag a

339

340

The Pit Vipers—family Crotalide—Continued.

Leydic’s\investications of the “'pit? 2 essesese sear eee ere
Peculiar tothe crotalids 2¢- 5-27.42 2 Se see pepe eee eee
POISON apparatus = 22552. -a.ce% cade) ce Bee eee ee eee
Osteolosy 2235 tse ate ne so jee 2 Coie ete See ee eee ee ee
Muscles. .2..¢. 2 s20 52.6 eb ssn oct. Sask eoe eee eee eee aes
PANGS? d5-.0 5 foie. ce etd Sono or eoseret ole See ee
Reserve fangs... .. 224.22. i ind oe eee a Cae eee ee
Poison gland wc 225.24) sea. 8 Eek A coe ee oe ee
Poison duct... 2220 55. 4 sss oe eee ne eee ee eee
Does the poison! duct enter the tanto? ees.. oases
Niemann’ siaccount of ab-- 22 2ceee ees een eee eee ee
Wyman'’s account. 3.2522..22 coe ere ee eo eee
Johnston’s account:+< 5 2.225.252 522 5-2 ee eee eee
Musclesiacting on gland ).2 22-2522. fcc eee oe sieae Soe ne eee ee eee
Hypodermicsyringe....2 J 22 2. 522.52 Sees cee ee ee
Poisonous fluids 2-2 :2s5o5 Ses ee aoe 2 Sa eee en eee ee eee
The bites s8 Sibss 5. ashes aoe 2s eee ee ee
Controversy about the movements involved......-......---.....----
Action as desceribedeby Dr Matic hell ae esses eee se ee
Headless snakes ‘striké.252 2. 4.5--c1- Se oe ee ee ee
Prof; Brewer’s adventures 522 asc553.- 2 seca te se errs nee ee eee
Catlin’s adventure... 2:2 s255 223 See Soto e ote ee ee oe eee
The rattle: ose). SSS Seas aie ae cas eats ete nee ee ee ae ee
Deseription wc c= Sos Sees ots ate ne oe ee eee
Internal: structures 2.05. hee 23.2 eee ace kod sh eee eee eee eee
Garman’ on the development of the rattle----.-2--- 2-2-2. eee
RatiovOl Srowthe 2s s 25.255 sess seo be Seater ee otek ese eet eee ee
Sloughinee=>-=-- Bee here AP Bors tice Sc
Feoktistow’s observ anes on ie ronan SEER peta eeo soe es accs =
Queleh:on-the'sanle. subjects) 2.5 -- js = tee ee ere ee ee
Number of joints in Tattle >... 2. 25..5222- 2 ote Sane see eee eee eee
Shapeaccording, to ages: 228 Sean oe eee eee ee eee
Position when ‘sounded. <.2.2.5 2322.2. cscan cet cee eee soe eee
Sound: ss osc 2G abide Gee Se > oo ee BOR Ee ee eee oe
Feoktistow’s investigation of number of vibrations......------------

REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Ott’s experiment. 3/0322. ass ckeete eles Sade Slee ee ela ee eee

Purpose. of the rattles 22S 2s eA Sey See alee eee
Evolution of the. rathle. 3:.oseeo nae, We one
Derivation of the rattlesnakes2.2-5-- 25234-4225 eae eee oe eee eee
Power of “charming: ?\s> s2asssee ss epee ore eee
Kalin’s explanation: 2226 oe eee ene eee eee
Mitchells opinion: ae: seer ses eis eee ee ee
BrehmisjexpenlenCe a s-ose 42 2se | ee See ee ee
Ey pnobismysue mes ted ae m ssa ete ete een cree ate eee
Alleved fetidtamell 0.2.24 oo as ee ee ee
Rattlesnakerdens'2 5 {2-5 2 anke. se eee eee eee eee
Hudson/’s*explanatione = .5e. a2) See eee ee eee
Breeding habltsrce-n- e220 ao o-eln ss 2 eee eee eee
““Do the snakes swallow their younm?” .......----..--..--
Mimicry of crotalidiswalk@so sees. ter ee a ee ere eres oe ana
Natural history of the pit vipers of the United States. .----
SyTopsis/orsthereener ales sre aati ee eee teeta ee
Genus Agkistrodon ......--- 2 2b ee eetnt oe
Synopsis of species in the U nee tates PP oan as

CONTENTS. d4]

The Pit Vipers—-family Crotalide—Continued. Page.
he Copperhead—Aghistrodon contorivig = -.-.-....-.-2-0--==---- 2sc----- 401
SALMO SB eo ee oe COSA R anaes Soc ced coc ee eso Ones pane pen corse 401
TNO) ogo dg ieeddes Pebeep SEOr se oS bo. Some ho ceaer a Sap eeoeree matenaT 402
CaS EGO MS yl OMA 2 ever cme erie saa a Scie aot imin 2 ase so tae eo 402
IDES CIO Sa eSs ee oee Hos hos Seen cele 0 Cee ae ae Sea ee eee 402
Weititnlo Men sees aga ose ee oe Su ee Rae Sheaves Seekers He ees ee seis 404
Geographical distribution............-....-- So SDC R eee ae ae 404
His) ¢ RUBS SeSSeeeeceos naseron OG ca 0d COE E coe ee oor sae ie eae 405
The Water Moccasin—Aghkistrodon piscivorus ......--..---------+--------- 406
SOV IOI NY SeueASperoaeee ace 6 SObs.8 cece Ache ce CGO en SOR a eet 406
MIG\IIGiy oe SSSA Rees Sees Serta Sa DOU aos BOSS Ae eee Epa as 406
IWENCripuloneece ns a2 ee eee See eemeiae eee - oh ceae ce ticles cae oe. 407
WMG TOE SAE GOSS eects tne SAS o8S. Sie ode Seren See nn er ee ree eee 408
Ceorraphicalodistribupionescerr se esses or see Seem ers ees Sah cie ees 408
ISLALOIEY Gadwee acioue aes ei So RSS SEAS earn ae a eee Ieee ee 408
(EGRnINS 1 NSU AUN AN artes Ses SEIS ESOC OG OSE 6 Dae ae tO eee rae ee 410
Synopsis of species in the United States.....-.......--...-......---- 410
The Massasauga—NSistrurus catenatus .....-.-----.-..----+----- seis st. 411
SVM OM Myers ere een iaeine ee ae ae eet Sn cts a aow class Dove ect sbe Ne Slo 411
FIGS cotesesbavoponecde Sado oqo SOnoaeeets Gee abdd 6 sCepere tao oOooo 412

| Das eit iis sho 54s oSca i hsts dos cece tbened oe ee geeu see sSunenebo [de soco 412
Warn tablOns o8 ee lec Le ea Som see oe ce ci me raed Pat las salen bse se clade seme 413
Premera Gd MOINe TO UMON- oa oh clase cmice m0 2s <== sas secss ces aesuceae 413
ONIN eaticSs Sane Heaeae S ooeen ee 4a obo SMES SUn Cnet CG a ooo ee sconce 414
The Gulf-coast Massasauga—Sistrurus catenatus consors ..-..-------.------ 415
RV INOH MTN, Bt oo HoS6ec Gop celasse Jo 5504 StgnUO oo eee re eae so Sus care 415
IOUTESt= 2 fee .ces ee oS ae ee te as Noe ceased SEO Series Lee Sak 415
PGE GS eee ate ec et al iclsloh Sai lee eo eintnsk c ocle)sciee elie aese tess 415
IDEN GUI DLON ee see cc) feveriae See ahs Moca aisle side emis ors eisisis cles tceis 415
Edwards’ Massasauga—Sistrurus catenatus Edwardsti ....-...----.-------- 416
SVQ GOS SN ees Bees See ie coe acnood encom eee Bee See 416

EST OU OS eas eee ie oe hers eee he etme Wane clot Shea tae Swale esos iets sees 417
WESeTIDUMOMEee ure ha een ae ee een at eee soar ass Sela ae ee ects A417
ETSI 2 obese a Ra ate Nips ee ee EERO oe Ae mee eae sn 417
GcociaphicalnGisonnowbiO Messe: pees eet soe nn ierceecion se aracieie rete 417
ELLOS pepe eee ome cise See Teer iee ake nace Bees coe bs bare ISS see 418
The Ground Rattlesnake—Sistrurus miliarius.....-..----.----------++---- 418
PS VALOIS tse SRS tee aes cies Sine Ae mini Hose Bee Stee eiieecs 418
AOU OS eee ae are ciate an ae) iaiS.c ler toe see ee ese Seeded esese Sebeee 418
WES CHI MON eres sss boas ase ake Seon te sis es th tee ade eet ide 418
WERE DID 35s eo Bireak OR er eee OS Ree Rh pee rg eee ae eee 419

(Cem oneal Calais nin MINOT s est ues Sete eae seem she ee eicin. sie sia eie'seclaiwia'e 420
IRIDU ONIS & VSS c Uae id See Sais OE OID See ee eae oe Ran ee ae ae 420,

( OSYOONSS LOPRINATHAT sce ORs ee CK NS a ne Se ea 421
Ny gELOO UM yp MUN retetentene aye eh avec els Seat ats aiaiarnvetowinrsars sista bose sco aiew eis alae a's 421
Coosraphicalydistrib mink seme mes-as a 5ce Saco s cic sees. Sloeicc as 421
Synopsis of speciesiin) United States:: 2+ 5...2..222i5-25.5 222-65 5.5.-% 423
The Dog-faced Rattlesnake—Crotalus molossus .....-..---..-------------- 424
SUV MODE ae eevee oar tee ets tees fac a is oc Sei deat ewelleweees 424

Ea CU GS po ere ete yee ase ober al sfalecicora\ setae lac cies ow aie ato wielaies wie seis Sees 424
WES GI Ol meee eee Fees ater a steak etek cicicc awd Sees ee « 424
FAT UL OME ee aes alas) Set nates acini Cciacle oxtscicicul sence wisistei's Svecwes 425
Pee CA NIOt INGE UU ULOONsas ~seie mel. = ees oats a Lio Lte S S e eee o 426
OSL Sete teeta tate raters ie eteieests ein loreiara’ > << 'c)ictc'bicten'siwjc cloaleio osiele ie «GMa aheiae's 426

342 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

The Pit Vipers—family Crotalida—Continued.

The Banded Rattlesnake—Crotalus horridus ............--..--------------
SYHONYMY - 3. 2-6 ese oo Sas nie ee ee eee ere ere ee tee ee eee
IGS 350545 Seatac bsbaceoan ye Ja sstars! startie Rrcie cheep ele ee maar area eee
DOS CTIPILOM: Seem cee ei cie = = ste alata Tel eee
Variation. - ee Serco
Gevecaphibal Aiscneinon dio Drees Slee) Seer Sera ele
8) 0) 0 ee RAP REE carer Conch so ste orth: Asta cot

The Diamond Rattlesnake—Crotalus adamantens ......--- ~--------------
SHENG NIN (a Bema eRecerca snose odds bocbos.4os5 oo st Jee totes sess =
WUPULES 35.25 <\=/ sec ers alae a eter et a
Description . - 22. see hie ee cer tls yee no ee eee
Variations... oe 3c ley ca = stays Sats oper ete Cee ee
Geographical distribution: =. 22-42 2-2 eee Beene hove
Habits 232252 2s 2 ares se ale are rey eater re re ee ee

SyMOMYM yes noses lato sya als atsio sis SS yas Ws eae meee es Seana ee
PiGures) racist boasts a: eee Tc kidd a eee ene ae Soae
Deseriptiony. 2242.5. ccse sees esedt soe oe ee
Varlationes sca ee ke eee? ao Seon s ae ee eee sata ee
Geographical ‘distribution, 2.2... +. 2. /- 25S yasgagoeee es ae ee
Habits JPacd ele ceUC oe Boe eee ee eek sce Oe ee ee

Description -...---- .--- ---- ---- ---0- -- 5202 cone ee ene cen eee enn eeee
Variation =. 2.2...0s8222e ech ae ua reeioes ase eee ee ee ee ee ees
Geographical distributions-< 22: 0: S222 2 2ee ee eee
Habits. 225 lose ese oi oo. SE ae oe ae ae Se ee
The Prairie Rattlesnake—Crotalus confluentus .....--...------------------
SyMOMY MY! 5225 snc sasack oboe dere eae tear a ae
Piguress. 2:0. lisse eee ese wees ew ee See ea eee ee eee
Déscription S52 52% 3 sees cet sas: oe censors See eae eee eee
Variation... = ..< ood Sek Gni soso ss Bde os dase es Does asaee Se eae
Geographical distribution 235224255252 6>-- ose foe eee ere
Habits. : s.246,22 2h oe eee oe ee ete J eiswe ba es Sea er ee Be eee
The Pacitie Rattlesnake—Orotalus! lucifer sas ss-e eee e
Synonymy ~-..2 -25 2.25520 e aes Sone Sods ee ose eee ee
Pigures, 02 see. 6050 Lb-5e5 oO ete Shader oe ee ee eee ee
Description: .. 222 2202 222.5 saaceeiss GaSe ee ae ogee ee eee
Variation so: 222.2268 1cn sooo eo eRe eee ee eee lace eae
Geographicaldistribution) 22.22 = cose oe eee eae oe ee
Habits) =25..22- sia0SS 2h ua, pees ses SER eee eee
The Tiger Rattlesn: eau har US
SY MODY NY er. oe tcc oe ek a reesei rae Ore Se renee Stee ee

Ri GuPes ys 252% 35s ikece cins SS hats Ohh ee eee
omer aa Sretisil an ods eee Se ee eee
Ganeeeaiieal dienipenon nite ghd cdc Suber ee ee se ee ees
Habits. - ae ote eordel Sehosc sees oe
The Horned Renenake= Cr ates CORUSUOR a8 ous Doe Sle ee Se 4 teaerreeree
SyMONYMY . sss secscd se daete sls on ssa ease oe sieatelgts aateae eae eee
Wigures)..: v2 sccceg occ 205 sccete oe oe ee eee See =e a eee
Descriptions . .csteten tos sens steerer e Seen ee oe ee ee
Geographical distribution: 225. 252 2- ae seis se oe See
Habitats] s- see oes oe nels Sees eee Reet ee eee

The Green Fnttleanaleo=eraas dohstciui » Sissies SEs So ee

SynonyMy. 2/5 22s s ens saree ote else ae a teers ere te ee

- 440

CONTENTS. 343

The Pit Vipers—family Crotalide—Continued. Page.
The Green Rattlesnake—Crotalus lepidus—Continued.

ee ete aetna a iia cS x MSR Soke ls ate oie erie coin gee ace he 452

WETENIIOVi) 5< eS cone BEGRES Sone SESS Bose er ae eae eae eee 453

(copraphicals distribu blome.-. ss seem oseeess eosceo es. see eee odinces 453

ETAL Meet SM eleyoarss saat cles Sem Ran oa cine iecroerre oe ae clack we elisierseewe 453

The White Rattlesuake— Crotalus Mitchellti........---...-.--.----------- 454

Synonymy ..--.--- RN Pete ae ee ISR es Ecos ccme eb a se osp See 454

DSA UOMO satya toe een eee aie tae wid setae ace sce ee esas 454

REM EID Meret fete Mt. ose eee here oe me ene e oc ope es oats 455

Geoprapiicals QISpriDUtlOnbe seers eames o> 25 ns oe Sstesie + ects os bases 456

. URED MUS) he een I IE ot so See ae 456

The Red Rattlesnake—Crotalus Mitchellit pyrrhus .......----------------- 456

SV DLOU VAN cte ec sere ae ne Stare tute Sint sloslctel sliactae ds wesc 456

LGR Sect nec odaas ao= SHEA Pee eS Oe Sete eres aati 456

Weseripbionn.n- 2. 2-eaneces =.= 2 Meee ee NS oto oie wters eitte coisa ieahoeas 456

Ceorraphieall (istribmitlom ges are 20 eae ae asses e aioeiay a Se cine we wie ee eee 457

TRENDS) GAAS 6 SecGen CoH Gone Bee Ho See e ee eo EOS he eas ents eee ste ae 457

HE OOIsSONCOIsbNe | POISONOUS SNAKES). sa. conn 2s... oct oem ee sess ce eee cose es 457

OTe Coleen sree Re See oem ote cto tare we wade ateln ci oeSwiseee beer etn oe 457

MethodssolminvestiCablOn-- ts aee a yee aaa > ac scs cee. Sao c eeese scent 458

Mapas fi ObtMININe POISON 2252955562 -4226 5228 fo525 es ~-e See -o a. 458

einySlcalachanaCberisulCs(. 25° s0ssciter sic jeae ws be cose Sees Soman c ecm 459

@hemicalscharaGheristies.... sco. oa5- eae seo c2s oss se asee dees e's $e. AGO

AGHIOS Jog sb bcd CE SH COCHON SOS AES BESISe CORO OSE SOE D Saar sere aoEae cet 460

PAN ea OT Serta arsenite Sa oe stele eats alo aime invaretnpare ois a)a)o)s fo aretevaje, oleic 460

| PROUENOE) sch OSS SS aS EERE Cee Sete eS Oe i eee eae 461

Recent investigations and discoveries.......-....--...----.----- 461

Mitchell and Reichert’s researches. ......-....--.------------ 461

Wroltendenis results ie senses = << aot lncwc.cemsias seldicice oclsjeaise 463

MartingandySmuith’s stndiess. = 2-52) = <1 iss asians cio ssf asf oe 463

HEOKiStOWeS IM VeStICALIONS sso - = scmiie soe o\- am oie a oaiae vaeiatale 464

Kaufmann’s studies of the viper venom..--....-...-.-..----- 465

Kaufmann on the action of chromic acid..........--.----.-.- 466

Calmeute SiOXperlments) sees so. Se eesis = sae cio cies ln ane See 467

Mhewsearch forantidoves 2-2-2 2sse cae 3- 5c) sa as cals ae coclsscemisnie bee 468

Atle Ohio We ge na are arate aeie ta cietciaynieine: Sie wis! isis atetersts'sniera eleva ainatate 469

PASTING Th igre aye see a ein Sis oyale eo aie wie as ala\ca'o 6 Si6iele eels Sielsayaleic 469

SMT OMANIG 25a Skeseemen a ebee Cha MObArh bie Coe ne Oe DEO e a eeEe re 469

TWANG ACHP ACIOM, pens Aeeaeaee conn soonIsGcoE opmaomedooce 469

PAS ORG ler tee yet nee ice ais = ol alclel ais etefe ale ere eta sje rcie te wictorels 470

Mitreller S¥GISCOVOR Ye can sesiys Sets Se avetaiel=: aiej2 or stniele'</e, cieie,<!<ieiermlwie 470

Opposition to Mueller’s treatment............--...---.------ 470

Male em sare livers eae te a a hay stas alata! avajais cic lcisrcin 'eie'ss seme 471

The strychnine treatment in India...............-.---.------ 473

The search for a physiological antidote goes on.-..........--.-+------ 473

Yarrow’s investigations and experiments............-.-..------- 473

AP ea ATL Gl dieses eee vats eee tes Nama cn encode Somes, tse 473

GRO pam G ES ens rena ee rst ee oe <li cele Ina cl amreicmaciee aocinies 474

The elimination of the poison by the system...........-...---.---------- ATA

ra NOt eee enero eee seers aera se sjnts Sais cis ao me's asda os cien sss 475

OTERO bio So Tk Oi aS a ee SATS

SEEM GLUS eee eereier ene nice eee ia wise ala croic on oes aie ea ew cis oneness 4T7

Kanfmann’s directions for injecting chromic acid........---..-------- 477

Teenie Tayo EhinOing enacts coSedco 7 = paO bas eee ae ee Dee ee esac ieee 478

Ser MERION A wee Se Cesc adam stacivavatecede es yeneenvesvers ATS

344 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

The poison of the poisonous snakes—Continved. Page.
Preventive inoculation—Continued.
Immunity of snakes:acainst venom), sjs-5ee 2a. eee eee eee 479
Experiments of Phisalix and Bertrand .---.........=-..----).+-.---- 479
Calmette’s ‘serum’ vaccine: .....2.)..22 5.202 += spent eae eee 480
Extermination of poisonous snakes -. <0... tic 200 «ee aoe Sees ee eee
Decrease of poisonous snakes. .<- ; =. cstssesjhccslen a eee oes eee 481
TiQGALINCTOASC 2... n= 0. cies 28d wn aie nin 5 Seweine am eal ote he 481
Desirability of discrimination between poisonous and harmless snakes... 482
whe question.of bounty .. .- 22.22 225 Se ete aan See ie 482
The: resultin Prance <2 2.202 2eeacssieme eos os vere eee et eee eee 482
Bounty a failure)... 22.022 S26 seca e cee tee eee ee ee ee eee eee eee 484
bist of illustrations. .\2 5... cosas tovepacisioe soe ae nen eee eee 485

THE POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA.

By LEONHARD STEJNEGER.

Curator, Department of Reptiles and Batrachians, U. 8S. National Museum.

It is the purpose of the present paper to give in a convenient form
a review of our knowledge concerning the poisonous snakes of North
America; to make the results of the specialists in the field accessible
to a larger public; to bring together in one place a summary of an
immense literature very often beyond the reach even of the student;
to point out where our knowledge is defective, and to suggest new
avenues of research.

Many popular errors will be corrected, while others will be disposed
of by a simple statement of facts, from which the reader is expected
to draw his own conclusions. No attempt will be made to discuss and
controvert the purposely exaggerated stories with which the literature
of the day abounds.

THE SO CALLED “HARMLESS” POISONOUS SNAKES.

If a snake is caught, killed, or seen, and any question raised as to its
poisonous or harmless nature, it will be found that the presumption of
guilt is against it, and that incontrovertible proof will be required by
even highly educated people, not specially informed, before they are
willing to believe in its innocence. An expert insisting that the snake
in question belongs to a species wholly devoid of poison would probably
during this discussion be met with the statement that a serious case of
poisoning had once come under the observation of one of the persons
present, the result of a bite of this very kind of snake. In spite of the
fact that nothing iscommoner and easier than misidentification of snakes,
and that consequently the bite might have been caused by a really
different kind of snake, the expert would not be in a position to contra-
dict the accuracy of the statement, though he might be able to recall to
his opponent quite a number of similarly serious cases resulting from
the bites of animals unquestionably non-poisonous in the accepted mean-
ing of the word. He might quote Livingston’s statement that the bite
of the large felines is commonly followed by symptoms of poisoning,
and he would relate cases of swelling and inflammation of serious

345

346 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

extent, perhaps even death, undoubtedly caused by the bites of rats,
dogs, eats, cows, horses, and even man himself.

It is clear then that we can not always conclude that a snake belongs
to a venomous kind from the fact that its bite results in symptoms of
poisoning. Modern science shows us that such results in other animals
are due to the presence in their saliva of those minute organisms, the
bacteria whose name at least is nowadays so well known to everybody.
The general public knows these cases as blood-poisoning, the pro-
fessional man refers to them as cases of septicemia. The fact that
the poison of snakes is only a modified saliva should not lead anybody
to suppose that snake poison and the bacteria-infected saliva—though
both may lead to fatal results—have anything in common in their
nature. On the contrary, the sooner both the general public and the
medical practitioner understand this difference and act accordingly, the
better.

When speaking of poisonous or venomous snakes, therefore, I shall
only refer to such snakes as are provided with a specific—to them
peculiar—poison and an apparatus especially adapted for the introduc-
tion of this poison into the wound of the victim.

The question naturally will be asked: “‘ Which, then, are our poisonous
snakes ?”

The proper answer would be that only those of our snakes are refer-
able to this category which are possessed of a movable or constantly
erect poison fang at the anterior end of the upper jaw bones, and even
those who, on slight information, profess to be well informed, would in
most cases admit that the above answer is correct. But it may be
shown that this is only partly so.

Students of snakes have for more than fifty years kept an eye on a
certain category of snakes as “ suspects.”

It seems that the Dutch professor, Reinwardt, while in Java, was the
first to discover that certain snakes, dreaded by the inhabitants of that
island as venomous, are provided with long grooved fangs at the pos-
terior end of the maxillary bone. He communicated this discovery to
Dr. H.. Boe in Leyden, who published it in 1826.* The suspicion
expressed by Prof. Reinwardt that this channel or groove on the
anterior side of these fangs might convey the fluid from a poison gland
led to several important investigations, the first of which to be pub-
lished was Dr. Hermann Schlegel’s memoir on the salivary glands of the
serpents with grooved teeth.t

He came to the conclusion that inasmuch as he found the structure
of their glands to be similar to that of other salivary glands, there could
be no doubt that they secrete ‘a fluid similar to the ordinary saliva;”
and as “recent observations of travelers” served to show that the
bites of snakes with grooved teeth produce no fatal results to man, he

*Oken’s Isis, 1826, p. 213.
tNova Acta Acad, Leop. Nat. Curios., Bonn, XIv, 1828 (pp. 145-154).

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 347

asserted with characteristic positiveness that it is ‘“‘ erroneous” to class
with venomous serpents those snakes which have the posterior teeth
long and channeled. However, a short time after, Prof. G. L. Duver-
noy, of Strasbourg, published a no less important treatise on the sub-
ject.* He pointed to the yellow portion of the supramaxillary gland
as being structurally different from the white portion, and from its being
connected with a large grooved fang by a single duct le coneluded, with
equal assurance, that we have here before us a venom apparatus only
in degree differing from that of the snakes with poison fangs fixed to
the anterior end of the maxillary bone. Hisresults were accepted and
introduced into the classification adopted in the monumental herpeto-
logical work of Duméril and Bibron, the Erpétologie Générale, in
which the snakes with grooved posterior fangs were placed in a separate
group as “Opistoglyphs.” On the other hand, Schlegel, paying no
attention whatever to Duvernoy, in his ‘““Physiognomie des Serpentes,”
maintained his standpoint, and so great was the authority of the learned
Leyden professor that his view was until quite recently accepted by
some of the most prominent systematists. It seems that neither side
ever attempted to end the dispute by direct experiments, and gradu-
ally the Opistoglyphs to many herpetologists ceased even to be “sus-
pected.”

About ten years ago the interest in this question was suddenly
revived, and as it may now be fairly regarded as a burning one, some
space will be devoted to a short review of several of the recent inves-
tigations into this theme.

Two Italian students, M. G. Peracca and C. Deregibus, were led to
make special investigations into the possible venomous nature of Mal-
polon lacertina (=Celopeltis insignitus), a snake common about Nizza
and in parts of Italy. In acommunication to the Academy of Medicine
at Turin, in May, 1883, + after first describing the grooved fangs, the
glands, and the duct leading to the fang, they recounted their experi-
ences with the snake in question:

Their experiments were carried out with two specimens of Celopeltis
(=Malpolon), one of medium size, the other much larger; the victims
consisted of lizards, frogs, and toads. The snake did not bite them
voluntarily; it was necessary to open its mouth and to force the animal,
into its throat; whereupon the snake inoculated the venom, the motion
of the bone carrying the poison fangs being very distinctly seen on
account of the manner in which they were standing out from the poste-
rior part of the head. The act of biting lasted some moments, and
the snake repeated this act several times without allowing its prey to
escape.

The animals were bitten in the hind limb; in the case of the frog the
-skin had to be removed from the part to be bitten, as the irritating

* Ann. Sci. Nat., Xx V1, 1832, pp. 144-156 ; xxx, 1833, pp. 6-26.
tGiornale della R, Accademia di Medicina di Torino, (3) XXX1I, 1883, pp. 379-383.

348 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

secretion of the skin appeared to be particularly distasteful to the
snake. Without reciting the various experiments in detail, the authors
state the more apparent phenomena accompanying them to be, (1) the
suspension of the respiration, which, in the main, occurs in a very few
minutes (thirteen minutes being the maximum in a toad) and may
happeu suddenly, or may be preceded by a gradual sinking interrupted
by a deep breathing pause; (2) the cessation of reflex movements in the
bitten limb, while still persisting for some time in the rest of the body;
the excitements applied below the bitten point ceased almost immedi-
ately to be transmitted to the medulla and to show reflexes. This
alteration maintained itself local for some time, afterwards progressing
toward the periphery along the nerves of the wounded limb. The
general paralysis does not delay long in coming. It is but rarely
accompanied by convulsions. The heart continues to beat for a long
while (in the toad) but its strength decreases gradually. The blood
revealed nothing notable under the spectroscope; as a matter of course
it had become venous at the suspension of the respiration. The rapid
changes which were observed at the wounded point are noteworthy;
the muscular tissue became livid and inexcitable. Death ensued
generally in half an hour, or less; in a toad it took place in twenty-six
minutes. The heart of a frog continued to beat for many hours after.
The authors then call attention to the interesting similarity between
the above symptoms and those accompanying the poisoning by the
cobra de capello, and finally state that they have made controlling
experiments with innocuous snakes which did not have such effect
upon the animals bitten.

In a subsequent résumé of this article* the same authors add that
the effects of the bite of the Malpolon are not to be feared by man. “It
seems,” they say, ‘that the bite is only dangerous to reptiles, birds,
and small mammals (nice); young dogs have resisted the poison rather
well.” .

Similar investigations and experiments were carried out about the
same time, or a little earlier (1882), on an American species in Guana-
juato, Mexico, by Prof. A. Duges, who has published his notes concern-
ing Trimorphodon biscutatus,t a snake belonging to a genus representa-
tives of which have been found along our Southern border. He gives
figures of his dissections, showing the venomous gland with its duet
supplying the grooved posterior fangs with the poison. He records his
experience as follows:

One day as I was admiring the snake I saw him seize a Cnemidophorus sexlineatus
[the striped swift, a lizard], at the middle of the body, advancing its jaws so as to

bring the corner of the mouth in contact with the body of the lizard; for several
moments it chewed (a rare occurrence in a snake) its victim without the latter mov-

+t La Naturaleza, (Mexico), v1, 1884, pp. 145-148.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 349

by another snake (Ophibolus doliatus) which was kept in the same cage, thus pre-
venting me from finishing the observation. A few days after, the same Trimorpho-
don caught another Cnemidophorus by the left arm and chewed it several times. At
the end of a few minutes the bitten animal died without convulsions, without
- agitation, as if asleep, a little blood issuing from the wound.

A little later (1885), Mr. Otto Edmund Eiffe* published some observa-
tions, also made in 1882, on Tarbophis vivax, an opistoglyph snake
inhabiting the countries bordering on the Eastern Mediterr anean, and
from his account we quote as follows:

I offered the half-grown snake a perfectly healthy Lacerta vivipara, which he at
once commenced to lap with his tongue and then grasped slowly behind the fore legs.
The lizard defended itself as best it could and used its teeth well on the enemy. In
less than a minute the lizard was almost motionless, the jaws were powerless, and
the eves closed; before the expiration of another half minute the lizard died, and
was then swallowed.

Prof. Léon Vaillant, of the Museum of Natural History, at Paris,
observed the poisonous effect of the bite of another of the opistoglyph
snakes, Tragops prasinus, Wagler, and gives the following interesting
account of one of the observations :t

A small living green lizard was presented to the snake by means of a forceps. The
snake seized it across the neck without descending from the shrubbery among which
it used to live, and by the play of the jaws drew it back to the corner of the mouth.
The lizard tossed and bent about, winding its body and tail round the head of the
snake; three minutes later it hangs down inert, only the tail still trembling; aftera
similar space of time convulsions of the whole body occur again, twining itself
around the head, then relapsing without motion, except some spasmodic undulations
of the tail; this lasts for two minutes, and the animal is dead. It will be seen that
this poison must have been tolerably active, as it caused the death of the lizard in
about eight minutes after the puncture by the fangs, which must have taken place
when the lizard reached the angle of the mouth, as the snake made no movement
after that.

It seems quite plain from these observations that we have here to
do with a specific poison. The victims succumbed within a very short
time, and while it is evident that death was not caused by the mechan-
ical injury inflicted by the bite, nuch less by the shock, there is as
little room for assuming that it was due to the action of bacteria-
infected ordinary saliva.

These experiments have again roused the interest in the morphology
and physiology of these glands, and two years ago, sixty years after
Duvernoy’s work, Mr. F. Niemann published{ some investigations
upon this subject. Among other snakes he dissected and described
two species with posterior grooved fangs, and he clearly demonstrates
that, in both, the yellowish gland has already passed the innocuous
stage and become a true poison gland, though structurally somewhat
intermediate—as are, in fact, the fangs. He found in both species the
yellowish gland well circumscribed and clearly differentiated from the

* Zool. eanren: 1885, p. 45.
tMém. Centen. Soc. Philom., 1888, Se. Nat., p. 44 *.
{Archiv f, Naturgeschichte, Lvmt, i, 1892, pp. 262-286, pl. xiv,

350 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

true supralabial gland, although both glands are contained in the same
envelope of connective tissue, and he was able to trace the single duct
leading from the yellowish gland to the groove of the posterior elon-
gated tang. Oneof the species was T'ragops prasinus, Wagler (the same
species with which Prof. Vaillant experimented), and an inhabitant of

a the Bast Indies, the other being Leptodeira annu-
a) 5) _ lata, (.), from tropical America. Fig. 1 is a copy
Ea en aos : . . >
b ae, of Mr. Niemann’s schematic representation of the
~ arrangement in the former. lig. 2 shows a sec-
Fig. ele ~ a n . ‘ 7) . ~ FY ] yp
His spermine gf la lta s tion of the grooved fang near 1ts base, copied from
VIEW OF THE HEAD or the same author.
Beene That. these snakes are not entirely harmless
a Poison gland; 0b supra- ¢ : ; ’
labial gland. even to man, is evident from the very recent expe-
aa rience of Mr. J. J. Quelch, of Georgetown, British

Guiana,* who was bitten on the first finger by a large specimen of the
common red-white-and-black-banded snake, Hrythrolamprus venustissi-
mus, driving its hinder grooved teeth three times. down into the flesh.
About half an hour after, the finger became much swollen at the place
and distinetly very painful. It was not till about four hours atter-
ward that real relief was obtained, though the place
was tender for a much longer time. Another case
was that of the clerk in the Museum, who was bitten
on the finger by a young specimen of the. common
frog snake or Mattipi, Yenodon severus, whose hinder
enlarged teeth were driven deeply into the flesh, with
a result similar to that described in the case of the
other snake.

It will be observed that while the snake by which
Mr. Quelch himself was bitten is a true opistoglyph pace fac kes
with grooved posterior fangs, the.one which caused — TRAGoPs _PRasINus,

rs S : ° r NEAR BASE.

a similar result in the clerk, viz, the Xenodon, has pijareea. a Poison
the enlarged posterior teeth solid and not grooved. groove; bpulp cavity.
I would call attention to the fact, however, that this ae
identical species is described by Duvernoyt as having the yellowish
eland well differentiated. That the bite of the allied species, Xenodon
rhabdocephalus, did apparently have no unpleasant effect on Dr. Strad-
lingt is not difficult of explanation in view of the fact that occasionally
the bite of even some of the most dangerous snakes has been ineffective,
but enough is said to show that the question isnot an unreasonable one:
Is it essential for a truly venomous snake to possess grooved fangs?

Asa matter of fact, at the very moment of this sentence going to
press, the question seems answered conclusively in the negative by the
experiments of Phisalix and Bertrand, who have shown that the saliva

)

* Zoologist (3), XVU, January, 1893, pp. 30-31.
tAnn. Se. Nat., XXX, 1833, pp. 14-15.
{ Referred to in Miss C. C. Hopley’s, ‘‘ Snakes, ete.” 1882, p. 400.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 351

of even ordinary solid-toothed harmless snakes contains the same
specific poison which characterizes the dreaded thanatophidia. Fuller
account of their discoveries will be found in the concluding chapter of
this treatise.

However, since the character of the saliva of the harmless snakes
does not seem to play any role in their economy, so far as obtaining
food, or defending themselves against enemies, is concerned, we are
still justified in regarding the opistoglyphs as a distinctly specialized
group of poisonous snakes, aside from any consideration of their prob-
ably more or less close genetic relationship.

Although thus in the strictest sense poisonous, these comparatively
harmless snakes do not claim the deep interest which snakes, dangerous
to human life, through dread of the mysterious power excite in the pop-
ular mind. No attempt will be made then to treat of their structure
and other peculiarities, in the present connection, beyond remarking that
we have within the confines of the United States the representative of
four genera of opistoglyph snakes, which may easily be referred to
their respective divisions by the following characters:

Synopsis of the Opistoglyph Snakes occurring in the United States.

a! Head but slightly distinct; pupil round; no scale-pits.

Die NOM OLGdie Sota ee Ss cmimlac, tant e Semele jee = ski Se Sha abielas ele seis alee Tantilla. *

baa loned la pleseMte oes) a ee res wine Sas Saat 22 Siete oe oes Coniophanes. +
a* Head wide, very distinct; pupil vertical; two scale-pits.

tAlmON EM OLGAle ise ce ons sos 5.2)- aes nielalel siz, t vis. 2 5 EN SE AS See ae Leptodeira. +

OemlaWMOrMmOrerlOred Sees. ss2 sac). ccsee vss ns peels cee -cncccesee Trimorphodon. §

THE CORAL SNAKES.
FAMILY ELAPID.

There has been almost as much doubt about the poisonous nature of
the Coral Snakes, Hlapide, as of those mentioned in the preceding chap-
ter, but as there has been enough evidence to show that the bite of
these pretty animals may be fatal even to man, and as they are unde-
niably very nearly related to the deadly cobra, || the scourge of India,
the verdict has decided against them long ago.

There are numerous doubters yet, however. Letters areoften received
from Florida asking whether the Coral Snake, or Harlequin Snake tound

* Tantilla, BAIRD and GiRARD, Cat. N. Am. Serp., p. 131 (1853) [=Homalocranion,
DuMERIL, Prodr. Class. Ophid., p. 94 (1853)]. Type Tantilla coronata, B. & G.—Four
species, ranging from South Carolina to southern California and south.

t Coniophanes, HALLOWELL, Proc. Acad. Phila., 1860 (p. 484). Type C. fissidens,
GinTH. Onespecies from extreme southern corner of Texas.

t Leptodeira, F1TziNGEk, Syst. Rept., p. 27 (1843). [Sibon of authors, but not of Fit-
zinger.) Type, Dipsas annulata, SCHLEG.—One species from extreme southern corner
of Texas.

§ Trimorphodon, Cope, Proc. Acad. Phila., 1861, p. 297. Type, 7. lyrophanes, Copr.—
One species from southern Arizona,

|| See plate 19.

352 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

there, is poisonous or not, and the Museum is asked to decide bets
made by persons taking opposite sides on this question.

The cause of this diversity of opinion is usually that the person
defending the character of the Harlequin Snake, by quoting cases in
which the bitten persons did not suffer any more injury than if they
had been bitten by an ordinary gartersnake, has mistaken the identity
of the snake and confounded the really poisonous Harlequin Snake, or
Elaps, with one or the other of two or three entirely innocent snakes
which resemble it greatly in color and which inhabit the same locality.
It is a remarkable fact that this curious imitation or ‘‘ mimicry” of the
gaily colored Hlaps by one or more harmless species takes place almost
throughout the range of the former. So close is the resemblance in
some instances that even alleged experts have been deceived.:

On the other hand, it appears that some, at least, of the species of
Elaps are of a temperament so gentle that they only use their weapon
in very extreme cases. Prince Max von Wied seems to have been the
first to have raised the question as to the venomous character of two
Brazilian members of the genus (Hlaps corallinus and Hlaps marcgravit),
for he states* that he used to carry them about his person and that
they never even attempted to bite. The prince can not well be sus-
pected of mistaking the species, for not only was he an expert herpeto-
logist, but he described and figured. them both most accurately and
minutely. Our own well-known Hlaps fulvius has a defender of no less
high standing among the students of reptiles, Mr. Holbrook, the South
Carolinian author of the monumental “ North American Herpetology,”
printed in five sumptuous quarto volumes, who statest that the indi-
viduals he had seen had been of a very mild character, and could not
be induced to bite under any provocation whatever. ‘ Indeed,” he
remarks, ‘‘although possessed of poisonous fangs, they are universally
regarded as innocent snakes, and are constantly handled with impunity,
never to my knowledge having injured any one.” ¢

The “instruments of destruction” (which he refers to in the same
paragraph) are the hollow fangs, fastened, one on each side of the upper
jaw, to the anterior end of the maxillary bone. It will be seen that this
is an arrangement exactly the reverse of what obtains in the opistoglyph
snakes of the previous chapter, hence the genus Hlaps and its allies
are known as proteroglyphs.§ The fang being at the front of the mouth
makes it much more effective as a we1pon—in the opistoglyphs it can
even hardly be regarded as such—aud in it will be shown that the
little beauty is fully capable of using it when required.

The following case is a celebrated one, and in many respects highly

* Beitr. Naturg. Brasil, 1, p. 402 (1825).

tN. Am. Herpet., 11, 2 ed., pp. 49-52 (1842).

t LeConte’s statement to the same effect (Southern Med. Surg. Journ., Ix, 1853,
p. 652) is scarcely more than a copy of Holbrook’s.

§ From the Greek zporepoe (proteros), anterior; yAve7 (glyphe), a groove,

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 353

instructive. For full details the reader is referred to the report upon
it pubished by Mr. Frederick W. True* after the occurrence. A brief
account is, however, inserted here.

The victim was Mr. Zeno Shindler, an employee of the U.S. National
Museum, and the offender a medium-sized Elaps fulvius, received
from Mr. James Bell, of Gainesville, Fla.

On June 1, 1882, between 2 and 3 o’clock in the afternoon, prepara-
tory to making the color sketch trom the live snake which should serve
for a guide in painting the plaster cast to be made from it, Mr. Shin-
dler attempted to transfer the snake from the terrarium to a glass jar,
holding it tightly by the neck. At the moment he let go, the snake’s
tail touched the bottom of the jar, and before he had time to remove
his hand the snake fastened its fangs in his left index finger. The
snake did not strike like the rattlesnake, but bit hard closing the lower
jaw upon the finger, and held on so firmly that it had to be wrenched
off, by which operation one of the fangs was broken off in the wound.

The first symptoms, which appeared immediately after the bite,
according to Mr. True, consisted of violent pain at the wound. The
symptoms continued without material change to 4:30 p.m. At that
hour the first symptoms of drowsiness or unconsciousness made their
appearance, and remained until the morning of the third day.

At 7:30 p.m. on the day of the bite Mr. Shindler felt so ill that he
deemed it prudent to call upon bis physician, Dr. L. M. Taylor, of
Washington, whose treatment is given in full in Mr. True’s report.

In three days after treatment the patient felt in good health again.
About two months after the event, however, pain set in once more at
the bitten finger, extending to the knuckles; and after a few days an
ulcer made its appearance above the latter.

Mr. Shindlev’s troubles were not yet over, and as the periodical
recurrence of the symptoms have been very marked, I shall bring it
down to date (December, 18941).

Mr. Shindler tells me that every summer, a few days before June 2,
the day he was bitten, the wounded finger commences to pain, mostly
at night. <A sore is formed and soon breaks open, and as a result the
nail invariably comes off. The attack lasts for about two weeks.

Two years ago, however, and ten years after the accident, the recur-
rence was prevented by a remedy commonly used in Brazil against
snake bite, and brought to Mr. Shindler from that country by his friend,
Dr. A. de Bausset. The remedy consists of the leaves and stem of a
vine (Micania guacho) an infusion of which was taken internally imme-
diately before the expected recurrence of the symptoms, with the result
that, although the pains arrived on time, no eruption took place. His
experience in 1893 and 1894 was similar.

*American Naturalist, xvi, January, 1883, pp. 26-31.
t Dr. Yarrow has already reported the case up to 1886 (Medical News, L, 1887, p.624).

H. Mis. 184, pt. 223

354 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Mr. True, in the same article, also published letters from two Texan
physicians reporting three cases of bites by Coral Snakes, two of which
ended fatally, the first ones on record, I believe.*

Dr. Thomas Kearney, of San Antonio, relates one case, as follows:

The following case of a bite of a Coral Snake, followed by death, occurred near
Corpus Christi, Texas, during the last year of the “late unpleasantness.” An infant
child of Mr, Alexander Stringer was playing in the yard, and being attracted by the
bright colors of a coral snake, grasped it near the middle. The screams of the child
brought its parents to its relief, but too late; the snake had done its work. The
child lingered in great agony until the following morning and died, as above stated.
The snake, as described to me, was about 18 inches long.

The other cases were reported by Dr. J. Herff, also of San Antonio,
who wrote that one of the bitten men died in twenty-four hours, while
the other one recovered after an almost fatal prostration of thirty-six
hours’ duration:

Thesfatal case I know of came under my observation a few minutes before death
occurred under the symptoms of paralysis of tne heart. The second case was
brought soon enough for me to try stimulants—whisky, hypodermic injections of
ammonia, and fomentations of digitalis leaves over the region of the kidneys. The
man, a strong young Scotchman, recovered in three days, and felt only a feeling of
tingling in his extremities for some time after. * * * Both men kept the snakes
as pets, and the last one used to put his finger in the animals mouth very often to
show how tame he was. One day he, put it in a little deeper than usual, and while
trying to extricate it the teeth bit him.

It would, however, seem that death from the bite of this snake is not
so very uncommon, for Mr. Frederick A. Lucas informs me that a
brother of Mr. S. A. Robinson, of Orlando, Fla., has told him that he
knows of three fatal cases. I may also refer to the cases recently
reported by Dr. Einar Leennberg in the Proceedings of the U. 8.
National Museum (vol. xviii, 1894, p. 334).

That great authority on snake poison, Dr. S. Weir Mitchell, of Phila-
delphia, nevertheless asserted? as late as 1889 that ‘the beautiful Coral
Snake, the little Hlaps of Florida,” is ‘‘too small with us to be danger-
ous toman.” Dr. Paul B. Barringer, of the University of Virginia, in a
well-written account of “The Venomous Reptiles of the United States,”
read before the Southern Surgical and Gynecological Association, Nov-
vember 12, 1891,¢ strongly protests against this and quotes a case,
reported by Mr. Charles E. Coe,§ of a workman at Oakland, Orange
County, Fla., who died from the effects of a bite. About half an hour
after being bitten pains came on in his hand and arm, followed by
drowsiness and a dull pain in the head. A doctor was called, but the
man died eighteen hours after receiving the bite.

* Haciah however, states that the Harlequin Snake ‘‘may be f: ies misti ieee for
the scarlet snake.” (Medi and Phys. Researches, 1835, p. 127.)

+ Century Magazine, Xxxxvuill, Angust, 1889, p. 505.

{ Venomous Reptiles of the United States, p. 3.

§ Scientific American, LX1V, June 27, 1891, p. 401.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 355

In view of these facts before us it will no longer answer to apply such
adjectives as “harmless”* or “innocuous to man” + to a snake of which
it is positively known that its bite is dangerous. It is granted that
Hlaps is comparatively rare; that it is retiring in its habits, mostly
living under ground, and that it has a very gentle and amiable tem-
perament. When it does bite, however, its bite is as venomous as that
of a rattlesnake or moccasin of the same size, and even more so. It is
probably quite true that the snake, in all the cases referred to above,
was handled roughly and provoked beyond endurance; but it is also
true that it would not, in most cases, have had an opportunity to do the
mischief, if it had not enjoyed such an excellent reputation.

It has been repeatedly asserted that the’ mouth of the EHlaps is so
small that it can not bite as well as the other poisonous snakes. This,
however, is somewhat of a mistake. Externally and superficially the
head of the Hlaps appears very short and narrow, and the opening of
the gape of but slight capacity. An examination of the skeleton, how-
ever, shows the skull to be comparatively large and rather elongate,
especially the cranial part, which occupies fully two-thirds of the total
length of the head. The articulation of the lower jaw, which is ecor-
respoudingly lengthened, is consequently far enough back to permit, by
means of the elasticity of the ligaments, the opening of the mouth quite
out of proportion to the external aspect of the snake.

That this capacity is not a theoretical one is shown by the fact that
an Hlaps fulvius has been found which contained a well-preserved
whip snake, of the same length as the Elaps, besides the half-digested
remains of ‘a garter snake. The body of the Elaps was so distended
that the seales, instead of overlapping, were separated from each other
by considerable spaces of skin. ¢

The good reputation of the Hlaps in combination, on the one hand,
with the apparent insignificance of the wound and the lack of alarming
local symptoms, on the other with the great similarity it bears to really
harmless snakes, makes its bite more fatal in proportion to the number
of reported cases than any other snake in the country. The wounded
person usually does not know his danger, and does not take the proper
measures against a puncture which on the surface looks so innocent;
and as the action of the specific venom of the EHlaps is both quick and
violent when admitted into the circulation of the blood, the remedies
when finally applied can do but little good.

Morphologically the Hlaps is not distantly related to the cobra of
India, § that is, they agree closer in external and internal structure than
either of them does with the typical harmless snakes on the one hand,
or with the vipers on the other.

* Jordan, Manual Vertebr. Anim., 5th ed., 1888, p. 198.

t Cope, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., xrv, p. 680 (1892). °
{ Matthes, Denkschr. Naturw. Ges. Isis, 1860, p. 58.

) For an illustration of this, the most terrible of all the death-serpeuts, see pl. 18.

356 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

That their venom also is more nearly the same than is that of the
cobras and the rattlesnakes there can be no doubt. As will be shown
later on, the poison of these last-mentioned snakes has been investi-
gated and found to be considerably different, and although no examin.
ation of the chemical composition of the Hlaps poison has been made
as yet, as far as I know, the similarity in the symptoms shows that the |
venom of the cobra and the Coral Snake are very much alike.

In Mr. Shindler’s case the doctor’s report does not mention any local
symptoms beyond the swelling of the finger, and Mr. Shindier informs
me that there was no discoloration, as in the case of rattlesnake bites,
beyond the reddening near the wound. The absence of special men-
tion of violent local changes in the other cases is indication enough
that none took place, while Dr. Herff expressly states that “ different
from our common poisonous snakes, the bitten part would neither swell
nor become discolored,” nor could anything be observed on the wound,
except the small impression caused by the teeth of the serpent. But
this absence of local effect is just one of the essential characteristics of
the cobra poison as contrasted with that of the rattlesnake.

I have alluded to the extraordinary similarity between the Hlaps
and several perfectly harmless snakes inhabiting the same region. and
it is quite probable that the innocent nature of the latter is in a great
measure responsible for the former’s good reputation, just as reversely
several of the harmless snakes have received bad ames on account of
their external similarity to the venomous moccasin or copperhead.

It will therefore not be amiss to institute a comparison between the
coral snakes and their imitators,* in order to furnish a means of readily
distinguishing the venomous and dangerous reptiles from the innocuous
ones.

With the dead specimens in hand the correct identification is not
difficult. In the first place, the Hlaps is provided with permanently
erect, perforated fangs, that is, there is found at the front end of each
upper jawbone one solitary curved tooth, which has a channel running
through its «enter and a groove on its anterior surface, and which is
not followed by any other teeth t on the upper jawbone, while the
other snakes with which it can be confounded have no such perforated
fang but instead a series of smaller solid teeth on the entire length of
the bone in questien (figs. 3 and 4). Running the point of a pin or a
penknife along the bone just inside the upper lip will soon disclose
the presence or absence of these teeth. There are several other minor
points of structure and proportion which serve to distinguish the Hlaps.

*Tt seems as if the harmless snakes are the imitators, and not vice versa, because
the peculiar coloration of the various species of Elaps is more or less the same every-
where, while the harmless snakes resembling them belong to many different genera,
in soine of which there occur species of widely different color and pattern.

t Except, of course, the reserve fangs, likewise grooved.

POISONOUS SNAKES O}' NORTH AMERICA. oun

Thus it has very small eyes, smaller than the shields between which
the nostrils are placed, while in the inocuous. snakes the eyes are con-
siderably larger. The snout of the laps is short, blunt, and rounded,
while in the others it is elongate, conical, more or less pointed. More-
over, in the former the frontal shield is small, less than one-half the
size of one of the parietals, the latter much more than one-half.

Fig. 3. Fig. 4.
PROFILE VIEW OF SKULL OF ELAPS. PROFILE OF SKULL OF LAMPROPELTIS
-Atter Jan, (After Jan.)

With the live animals, free or captive, these characteristics are often
difficult of application. In such Cases it is necessary to rely upon dif-
ferences in the color pattern as a means of identification.

There are in the United States onl) two well-defined species of Elaps.
The characteristic coloration of these consists of a series of transverse
rings of black, vermilion,
and yellow. This pattern is
repeated in several species
and subspecies of the genus
Lampropeltis (or Ophibolus), Fig. 5.
known as “Searlet King- COLOR PATTERN OF ELAPS.
snake,” L. doliatus; ‘Red a
king snake,” LL. coccineus; “Ringed King-snake,” L. annulatus;
“Arizona king snake,” L. pyrrhomelas, ete., as well as “Osceola’s
Snake,” Osceola elapsoidea; the ‘Scarlet Snake,” Cemophora coccine,
and to a less extent in “Le Conte’s Snake,” Rhinocheilus lecontei, all or
some of which inhabit the same region as one or the other species of
Elaps. Inallof these red,
black, and yellowish is
arranged in more or less
perfect transverse rings.

Fig. 6. : ra
COLOR PATTERN OF LAMPROPELTIS. Le Conte’s Snake is less
Caiter tan) characteristic and like the

Cemophora, easily told apart by having the entire under surface whitish,
while in the others, including the Elaps, the red and black is more or
less continued across the belly. There is one fundamental difference
in the arrangement seen in the species of Hlaps within our boundary
and that in Lampropeltis, Osceola, and Cemophora, which is that in
our Hlapes that black rings are vorderd on each side by a yellowish
ring (fig. 5) while in the others the yellow rings are bordered on each
side by a black ring (fig. 6).

358 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

The difference is well shown in the accompanying figures, which also
bring out several of the structural characters referred to above.*

A formal though condensed account of the natural history of the
Hlapide occurring within the United States is here presented.

Genus ELAPS,t Schneider.
THE CORAL SNAKES.

1801.—Elaps, SCHNEIDER, Hist. Amphib., Ii (p. 289).—GUNTHER, Proc. Zool.
Soc., Lond., 185y, p. 84.

Postfrontal bone wanting; internasal plate not reaching labials; two
nasals; no loreal; subcaudal shields (urosteges) divided; eyes very
small, pupil a short vertical ellipsoid.

The snakes of this genus are cylindrical, rather elongate, but with
short tail, and characterized by bright colors of red, black, and often
yellow, forming rings. In many of the exotie species the black rings
are arranged in threes, while in the North American species those of
the body are equidistant. The scales are smooth and iridescent.

The exact number of species can not be given at present on account of
the uncertainty of the status of many of the described forms, but at
least twenty inhabit the New World, of which only two occur north of
Mexico.

While the poison apparatus of the rattlesnakes and their nearest
relations has been studied very minutely, that of the genus Hlaps has
been sadly neglected, as has been, in fact, its entire anatomy. Drs.
Matthes and Voigtlender have given short and superficial accounts
of Hlaps fulvius, from which t I make a few abstracts: The functional
fang in Hlaps fulvius is followed by reserve fangs of the same struc-
ture as the functional one, but successively smaller. The functional
fang is solidly united to the maxillary bone, being directed backward
at a permanent angle of about 45° with the latter. Although com-
paratively smaller than the fangs in the crotalid snakes, that of Hlaps
is large enough to distinguish it at the first glance as different from
the solid teeth of the palate and of the lower jaws. In front, at the
base of the fang, the opening of the canal is distinely visible, and on
the convex, or anterior, surface of the fang a shallow groove. The
terminal slit, being the lower opening of the canal, is situated slightly
on the outer side of the fang.

As already stated there are found in the United States only two well
defined species of Hlaps, but these are so sharply defined that they may
be told apart at a glance, by the following characters:

* The brilliant colors of all these snakes fade soon in alcohol; the red becomes gray-
ish or light brownish; the yellow grows pale, often quite white; and the deep black,
often bluish, turns a dull brown.

t From éAaw (eiaps), a Greek name for a snake.

t Denkschr. Naturw. Gesell. Isis, 1860, pp. 52-59, and p. 64.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger. PLaTE i.

HARLEQUIN SNAKE,—ELAPS FULVIUS.
From Baird, Rep. Mex. Bound. Surv.

POTSONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. B09

Synopsis of species of Elaps occurring in the United States.

Snout and frontal black, parietals yellow, followed by a broad black ring.

Elaps fulvius.
a? Snout, frontal, and parietals black, followed by a yellow ring and this by a broad
Tet GYR a SUS Re PEGE Oe ie Sat Oa Ser eC near sare Llaps euryxanthus.

There are, besides, several important characters derived from struct-
ural and proportional differences, notably in the size of the frontal
and the internasal shields.

Asarule FZ, fulvius differs from H. ewryxanthus in having the second
row of temporals consisting of only one shield against two in latter;
but this character is ky no means constant.

THE HARLEQUIN SNAKE.
Elaps fulvius, * (Linneeus).
Plate 1.

1766.—Coluber fulvius, LINN US, Syst. Nat., 12 ed., 1, p. 381.—DaAuDIN, Hist. Nat.
Rept., vu, p. 300 (1803).—Say, Sillim. Am. Journ. Sc., 1, 1819, p. 262.—
Elaps fulvius FItzinGER, Neue Class. Rept., p. 61 (1826).—HOLBROOK,
N. Am. Herpet., 1 ed., 0, p. 87 (1838) ;— 2ed., 11, p. 49 (1842).—DEKay,
Zool. N. Y., 11, p. 58 (1842).—Grirarp, in Baird and Girard, Cat. N.
Am. Serpents, p. 21 (1853).—Lr Contr, South. Med. Surg. Journ., Ix,
1853, pp. 651, 652.—DUMERIL and BIBRON, Erpét. Gén., VU, ii, p. 1215
(1854).—GUnTuHER, Cat. Colub, Snakes Br. Mus., p. 235 (1858).—CopPE,
Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 344 (1860).—Copsr, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No.
17, p. 24 (1880).—Copr, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., xu, 1888, p. 398 (1889).
—JAN, Prodr. Icon. Ophid., p. 6 (1859).—JaNn, Elenco Sist. Ofid., p. 113
(1863).—Matrues, Denkschr. Naturw. Ges. Isis, 1860, p. 52.—Voier-
LANDER, Denkschr. Naturw. Ges. Isis, 1860 p. 64.—Smiru, Rep. Geol.
Surv. Ohio, iv, p. 676 (1882).—GARMAN, N. Am. Ophid., pp. 105, 168

* (1883).—GARMAN, Bull. Essex Inst., xxiv, p. 5 (1892).—TRuE, Amer.

Naturalist, x vu, 1883, p. 27.—TRUE, in Hammond’s Sou'h Carolina, p.
235 (1883).—YARROW, in Buck’s Ref. Handb. Med. Se., v1, p. 166 (1888).
—JORDAN, Man. Vert. North. U. S.,5ed., p. 198 (1888).—FERREIRA,
Jorn. Acad. Sc. Lisbon (2) 11, Sept. 1891 (p. 94).—BARRINGER, Ven.
Rept. U. S., p. 2 (1891).—BuTLer, Journ. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist.,
1892, p. 178.—Hay, Batr. and Rept. Indiana, p. 121 (1893).— Vipera fulvia,
HARLAN, Journ. Phila. Acad., v, ii, 1827, p. 364.—HAaRLAN, Med. Phys.
Researches, p. 127 (1835).

1802.—Coluber fulvus, SHAw, Gen. Zool., 11, i, p. 469.—LATREILLE, Hist. Nat.
Rept., Iv, p. 140 (1802).—Elaps fulvus, Hoy, Smiths. Rep., 1864, p. 433.—
GUNTHER, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1859, p. 85.—BiGNnry, Proc. Md. Ac.
Se., 1891, p. 151 (1892).

1825.—Coluber fulvius, var. \H), HARLAN, Journ. Phila. Acad., v, i, p. 155.—HarR-
LAN, Med. Phys. Res., p. 180 (1835).

1853.—Elaps tenere, GIRARD, in Baird and Girard, Cat. N. Am. Serpents, pp. 22,
156.—MatTuHEs, Denkschr. Naturw. Ges. Isis, 1860, p. 52.—GARMAN,
Bull. Essex. Inst., xxiv, p. 5 (1892).

1853.—Elaps tristis, GIRARD, in Baird and Girard, Cat. N. Am. Serpents, p. 23.—
MarTtrHes, Denkschr. Naturw. Ges. Isis, 1860, p. 52.—YArROw, Bull.
U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, p. 82 (1883).

*From the Latin fulvius, for fulvus, tawny; misnamed from the the color of an
alcoholic specimen.

~ 360 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

1859.—Elaps tener, BARD, U. 8. Mex. Bound. Surv., 1, Rept., p.15.—GUNTHER,
Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1859, p. 86.
1875.—Elaps fulvius, subspecies fulvius, COPE, Bull, U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, p.34,
1875.—Elaps fulvius, subspecies tener, COPE, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, p. 34.
1883.—Elaps fulvius fulvius, YARROW, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, p. 81.
1883 —Llaps fulvius tener, YARROW, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 24, p. 81.
1883.—Elaps fulvius, var. tener, GARMAN, N. Am, Ophid., p. 169.
Figures. AUDUBON, Birds, I (pl. XLIV).—HOLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., 1 ed., 11,
pl. xvi (1838); 2 ed., 111, pl. x (1842).—Barrp, U. 8. Mex. Bound. Surv.,
11, Rept., pl. v11; fig. 1 (1859).—Bairpb, Pac. R. R. Rept., x, pl. xxv, fig. 15
(1859).—MarruEs, Denksch. Ges. Isis., 1860, pl. —, figs. 1-5.—Jan, leonogr
Ophid., livr. 42, pl. u, fig. 2(1872).—BocowurT, Miss. Scientif. Mexique, Rept.,
livr. 4, pl. xxur (1874).—GARMAN, N. Am. Ophid., pl. vi, fig. 3 (1883).—
YarRROwW, in Buck’s Ref. Handb. Med. Sc., vi, p. 167, fig.—(1888).
Description.*—The red may be considered as the ground color of the
body, though the black rings occupy nearly as much space above as
the red, so as to give the general appearance of succession of red and .
black rings. The yellow is intermediate. The anterior part of the
head from the posterior point of the vertical plate [frontal] embracing
the orbits is black, as is also the tip of the lower jaw. A yellow ring
passes across the occipital | parietal] re-
gion down to the inferior surface of the
head, embracing the space between the
TK posterior rim of the eye and the angle of
ise the mouth. Then comes a black ring,
covering 8 dorsal scales, margined poste-
Fig. 7. Fig. 8. riorly with yellow. From this region to
HEAD OF ELAPS FULYIUS. the origin of the tail, the black and red
Sugwa Hg Tee ae rings from 14 to 19 in number each, alter-
nate, being separated from each other by
a narrow band of yellow. The black rings cover 7 entire scales, and 2
halves; the intermediate red space 5 entire scales and 2 halves, and the
yellow either 1 and 2 half scales or 2 halves only. Some red spaces may
occasionally cover 9 and 10 seales. The tail,is alternately black and yel-
low; the first caudal ring is black and embraces 10 scales; the second is
yellow and covers 3 scales. Two black and 2 yellow succeed and cover
the same ground. The tip of the tailis black on 5 scales. The tip may be
either black or yellow, for according to the size there are either 3 or 4
black rings. Underneath the colors are the same but dull; occasionally
one or more black rings may not surround the body. The reddish
spaces are irregularly blotched with deep black as also sometimes on the
upper surface.
Number of ventrals [gastrosteges|, 202-237; of sub-caudals [uro-
steges|, 25-45,
Variation._-The typical form of Hlaps fulvius occupies the south-
eastern States, including Florida. Further west there is a slight
“By C. Girard in Baird and Girard’s Catalogue of North American Reptiles in the
Museum of the Sinithsonian Institution, Part 1.—Serpents, 1853, p, 21.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA, 361

tendency toward increasing the number of ventral shields (gastrosteges),
narrower frontal and parietals, widening of the yellow rings, and
greater size of black spots in the red rings. Individuals showing these
characters well developed have been called Hlaps tencre, or Elaps fulvius
tenere, but there does not occur in any locality a sufficient percentage of
individuals typical of the form to make it profitable tu recognize a
subspecies.

The status of some Florida specimens differing considerably in
pattern from normally colored EF. fulvius has not been satisfactorily
settled as yet. They are stated not to differ at all in structure or
proportions. Only a few specimens seems to have been collected—I
have myself only seen one—and that in a locality in which the normal
form also occurs. More material is highly desirable. Prof. Cope calls
them Hlaps distans. The chief difference from typical FH. fulvius con-
sists in the greater width of the red rings, which are not spotted with
black, and the consequent narrowing of the black rings to 2 or 3 scales.

Geographical distribution.—I do not know how reliable the informa-
tion was, upon which Holbrook states that the range of this species
may “be said to begin in North Carolina and southern Virginia,” for I
am not aware of any definite record of specimens taken in those States,
though it may well occur there, as we have quite a number of records
and specimens from South Carolina even as far north and back in the
country as Society Hill and Columbia. It extends over Georgia and
the entire State of Florida. From Alabama, Mississippi, and Louis-
iana there are numerous records. The Bead Snake evidently follows the
Mississippi River up a considerable distance notwithstanding the mea-
gerness of details known, and notwithstanding the fact that the vigi-
lant observers in St. Louis, among them Mr. Julius Hurter, have failed
to find it. It even ascends the Missouri River, as Dr. Hoy obtained it
near that river in about 39° latitude. How much reliance can be placed
upon the identity of the specimen which Holbrook quotes as in the
possession of Prof. Green, of Philadelphia, and said to have been
brought by Lewis and Clarke from the ‘‘ Upper Missouri,” I do not
know, but almost certainly there is some mistake. Recently two spec-
imens have been captured in southeastern Indiana and southwestern
Ohio under circumstances which make it appear probable that the
species occurs along the Ohio River (Hay, Batr. Rept. Indiana, p. 122;
Butler, Journ. Cincinn. Soc. Nat. Hist., 1892, p. 178). In the southern
part of Texas this snake is found in all suitable localities, ascending a
considerable distance into the interior along the great river valleys.
Thus along the Rio Grande it extends up to the mouth of the Pecos,
even ascending the latter, as Capt. John Pope’s specimens were col-
lected certainly not farther south than the thirty-first parallel. In
southern Texas, moreover, it reaches a higher altitude than farther
east, viz, over 1,000 feet, while none of the records of the eastern local-
ities show it to reach even an altitude of 500 feet.

e

362 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Habits.—Comparatively little is known of the habits of this beautiful
snake, which like its harmless mimickers is often known as the bead
snake, beyond the paragraph by Holbrook (op. cit. p. 50) repeated
by most writers on the subject since his days, viz, that it is found
living under ground in the sweet potato fields, and is frequently dug
up by the laborers when harvesting.

The food of the Harlequin Snake seems to consist chiefly of other
snakes and reptiles. I have already referred to a specimen which had
swallowed a Bascanion as long as itself before it had fully digested a
garter snake. Dr. Matthes (op. cit., p. 58) opened three more Hlapes
with the following result: No. 1 contained a half-grown Humeces fas-
ciatus; No. 2 had in its stomach a small snake, remnants of a lizard and
a few beetles, the latter possibly the contents of the lizard’s stomach;
No. 3 also contained a small snake besides remains of a small rodent.
Dr. O. P. Hay (Batr. and Rept. Indiana, 1893, p. 122) reports having
found a Storer’s snake, 134 inches long, in a Florida Hlaps, 21 inches
long.

Nothing at all seems to be known of the breeding habits of our
harlequin snakes.

This group offers a promising field for study by persons having the
opportunity to observe these snakes alive.

THE SONORAN CORAL, SNAKE.
Elaps euryxanthus, * Kennicott.
Plate 2. t
1860.—Elapseuryxanthus, KENNICOTT, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1860, p. 83837.—CoPE, Proce.
Phila. Acad., 1861, p. 296.—Copn, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1866 (p. 307).—CoPpE,
Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. No. 1, p. 34 (1875).—Copr, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. No.
32, p. 86 (1887).—Copr, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xrv, 1892, p. 681 (1893).—
Cours, Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 611 (1875).—StTrreETs, Bull. U.
S. Nat. Mus. No.7, p. 40 (1877).—YaRRow, Bull. U. §..Nat. Mus. No. 24,
p. 82 (1883).—GarMan, Rept. Batr., N. Am., Ophid., pp. 107, 169 (1883).—
CRAGIN, Bull. Washburn Laborat., 1, 1884, p. 8.
Figures. None.

Description.i—Body rather stout, but less so than EH. fulvius. Dorsal
scales large; plates of the head small, except the rostral, which is very
large and extends upward between the prefrontals [internasals|. Pre-
frontals [internasals| elongated laterally, more so than in EH. tener,
Postfrontals [prefrontals| small, elongated laterally; vertical |frontal|
very small and narrow, subhexagonal, pointed anteriorly, elongated
and tapering posteriorly; it enters but slightly between the occipitals.
Occipitals [parietals| small, subtriangular, the anterior edge square,

*From the Greek ripic (eurus) broad; favSdo¢ (xanthus), yellow.

+The figure cited is a half-tone reproduction of a colored drawing, hence the
yellow interspaces are entirely too dark ; it should be carefully compared with the
description.

{ Original description by Kennicott, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1860, p. 337,

PLATE 2,

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger.

“WNesn [BUOLYBN “g “9 8Y] UT UeUIIOAds & WO
SNHLNYXAYNA Sdv14—‘ayVNS 1VYOD NVYONOS

<=

<x

a

Stain San titn™ “ary

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 363

very slightly notehed for the vertical [frontal]. Seven labials above;
posterior very small.

The fore part of the head is black, but the black, instead of passing
forward from the anterior part of the occipitals |parietals| to near the
eye, and there leaving the three posterior labials yellow as in EL. fulvius
and #. tener, involves nearly the whole of the occipitals | parietals], and
passes backward entirely behind the angle of the mouth and involves
the whole of the lower jaw to behind the posterior labial, leaving
a broad emargination in the black on the occiput, in the bottom of
which emargination are seen the white posterior tips of the occipitals
| parietals |.

Behind this is a creamy-white ring (probably yellow in life), whichis
situated more posteriorly than in H#. fulvius, and involves only the pos-
terior tip of the occipitals [parietals] and none of the labials. Next
behind this white ring, instead of a black ring, as in the other species,
is a broad light brick-red one involving eleven scales. A creamy-white
ring three and a half scales wide separates this first red ring from a
black one eight scales in width. Behind this are alternate immaculate
black and red rings, seven or eight scales wide, and separated by white
rings three to three and a half scalesin width. There are eleven black
and eleven red rings on the body, separated by twice as many white
ones. The tail is ringed with black and white without any red. All
the rings run entirely around the body of the same color and are wholly
without spots above or below.

Number of ventrals (gastrosteges), 215-241; of subcaudals (uro-
steges), 21-29.

Geographical distribution.—This species is yet so little known that its
distribution can only be mapped out in a preliminary manner. It
belongs to the ‘“ Lower Sonoran” province, but seems restricted to the
regions east of the great Colorado River and west of the Continental
Divide. It has been found as far north as Fort Whipple and at various
places in southern Arizona, extending south into Mexico at least as far
south as Batopilas, in the State of Chihuahua, in the interior, and to
Guaymas, Sonora, on the Gulf of California.

In Arizona it reaches an altitude above the sea of at least 5,000 feet.

Habits.—Absolutely unknown.

THe sPlivyVirERS:
Family CROTALID A.

“Pit Viper” is a “book name” meant to include the Rattlesnakes,
Moccasins, Copperheads, etc., but unlike many others it is a most excel-
lent one, for not only does it indicate the relationship of these snakes
to the true vipers, but it also contains a reference to the remarkable
character which at once distinguishes them both from the vipers and
from all other snakes as well.

364 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

The name refers to the deep pit or hole found in the Rattlesnakes
and their nearest relations on the side of the face between the nostril
and the eye, and well shown in fig 9, This cavity sinks deep into the
maxillary bone and represents a “ blind” sac lined with epidermis and
is not connected with any of the other cavities or organs in the head
by any inside opening or canal. ‘There is nothing similar to be found
in any known reptiles outside of this family, if we except the labial
pits inthe pythons and boas, nor is there in any other class of animals,

When the earlier zoologists came to examine this peculiar structure

they, of course, tried to compare and identify it with other organs
already known, some hinting at the closed nostrils of the fishes, while
others pointed out its similarity, in position at least, to the so-called
‘tear-sacs” of the deer. It was even suggested that in view of the close
approximation of the pit to the poison apparatus it might have for
object the admission of air to act in some unknown way upon the secre-
tion of the venom glands, thus rendering the poison more powerful.

———

—i

wor

De

nostris

Fig. 9.

HEAD OF CROTALUS, FROM SIDE..

iInfralabials; lloreal; J! lower loreal; 72 upper loreal; 2 nasal; 7! anterior nasal; »? posterior nasal;
ppreocular; r rostral; s supralabials; s' 1st supralabial; s?2d supralabial, ete. ; so supraocular

It was plain, however, even to those who proposed these explanations,
that they were not the true solution of the question, and most authors
were satisfied with a reference to the pits as ‘“‘mysterious.”

In the meantime naturalists have become compelled to assume the
existence of a ‘sixth sense” in various animals, for which they had
discovered special sense organs, such as, the lateral line in fishes.

It was quite natural, then, that Prof. Leydig should come to the con-
clusion that the pit of the Crotalida is the organ of a sixth sense, when
upon a microscopic examination of the pit’s lining he found it supplied
with a thick nerve, ending in a way the only analogue of which is found
in the retina of the eye or the labyrinth of the ear.

Leydig’s material was in some respects defective, for he had only
specimens preserved in alcohol, and in his valuable memoir* on the sub-
ject twenty-five years ago he distinctly encouraged the North American
naturalists to take the matter up and continue his investigations on fresh
specimens, but, as far as | know, nobody has as yet done so. It may
therefore not be out of place to give a brief synopsis of his observations.

*Nova Acta Acad. Caes. Leopold. Nat. Curios., Xxxrv, 1868, No. 5, pp. 89-96, pl.
iv, figs. 28-32.

EE

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 365

The external layer of the lining of the pit Leydig found to be a con-
tinuation of the outer skin, which, however, upon entering the cavity
becomes thin and considerably moditied. The granular tubercles grad-
ually disappear toward the bottom, and the surface is found to be com-
posed of large angular epidermis plates containing nuclei (fig. 10).
Underneath this he found a layer of connective tissue, in which the fine
ramifications of the thick nerve supplying the pit are lost in a granular
substance which under high power reveals itself as containing numerous
true, rounded, but pale nuclei. The granular substance he found
arranged around the nuclei in such a way as to form groups or islands
of various forins and sizes separated by light narrow spaces. These
structures can only be regarded as terminal ganglions, and it does not
seem doubtful that we have here to do with a true sense organ.

PIECE OF SURFACE OF EPIDERMIS LINING THE PIT,

Greatly enlarged. a Smooth, thin portion from the pit proper; 6 tubercular portion at the edge.
(After Leydig. )

Wherein this “ sixth sense” consists we do not know, nor do we know
of Anything in the habits of these snakes which would indicate its
nature, or to what use the animal puts the organ. Future research
may reveal it, though perhaps man will never fully comprehend the
nature of a sense which he himself does not possess.

The “loreal” pit, so called because of its location in that portion of
the snake’s face in herpetological terminology known as the “lores,”
being acharacter exclusively pertaining to the Crotalid snakes, its pres-
ence in any of our North American snakes at once designates it as a
dangerously poisonous snake. Itisan unfailing character of our native
‘death vipers,” with the exception of the Hlaps, which I have already
characterized.

Another unfailing character is, of course, the presence of long curved
fangs in the anterior portion in the upper jaw. Since an account of our
poisonous snakes would manifestly be incomplete were | to omit a
description of the poison apparatus, a brief outline of its structure is
here presented.

J stated above that Hlaps has two permanently erect and perfo-
rated fangs in the anterior portion of the upper jaw. In the Pit Vipers

366 REPORT OF NATIONAL .MUSEUM, 1893.

there are similar fangs, but much larger, and differing from those ot
the Hlaps by being folded up toward the palate, somewhat like the
blades of a jackknife when not in use. This must not be understood
to mean that the fangs themselves are movable; ou the contrary, the

Fig. 11. Fig. 12.
SKULL OF RATTLESNAKE, FROM ABOVE, SKULL OF RATTLESNAKE, FROM SID.
(After Jan.) ( After Jan, )

viper’s fangs are as solidly fixed in their sockets as are those of the
Hlaps, but while in the latter (see fig. 3) the maxillary bones, into which
the fangs are fastened, are elongated and horizontal, as in the harmless
snakes (see fig. 4), in the Crotalids they are extremely shortened and
higher than long, so as to appear in a
vertical position. In the former the
fangs are consequently inserted nearly
at right angles, like the pickax on its
handle, while in the latter the fang
more nearly represents the blade, and
the jawbone the handle of a knife, and
itis the jawbone which is movable in
the vertical plane, not the fang alone.
In order fully to understand the
mechanism in question, it is necessary
toremember that the bones of the head
atlas: of nearly all snakes (figs. 11-13) are so
SKULL OF RATTLESNAKE, FROM BELOW. loosely joined together as to allow a
(After Jan. most extraordinary amount of move-
ment and distention. Elastic ligaments connect bones which in other
animals are either grown solidly together or articulated by means of
close joints, hence a snake is capable of swallowing a prey many times
as thick as the snake’s own body.
As already noted, the upper jawbones (maxillaries) are situated ver-
tically, one on each side of the anterior portion of the mouth, the hollow
fang being fastened into the lower end of the bone. On the outer face

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 567

of the bone there is above a deep cavity forming the bony walls of the
“pit” already referred to, which separates two articular surfaces. The

upper one at the top of the maxil-
lary forms with the corresponding
concave face of the lachrymal bone,
which projects from and articu-
lates with the frontal bone, a
hinge-like joint, allowing consid-
erable freedom of motion. The
lower surface receives the flat-
tened anterior end of the external
pterygoid bone. It will be seen
from the accompanying cut (fig. 14)
that if the latter bone (a) be moved
forward or backward, the maxil-
lary hinges on the lachrymal, and
that if the pterygoid be pushed

Fig. 14.
POISON APPARATUS OF THE RATTLESNAKE,
Right side. @ External pterygoid bone; D inter
nal pterygoid bone; e¢ palatal bone; d maxillary
bone; e lachrymal bone.
After Mitchell. )

forward, the fang is erected. ;

There are several muscles engaged in producing this erection and
the opposite motion, the depression of the fang, but we shall only
mention the two principal ones.

MUSCLES OF POISON APPARATUS OF
RATTLESNAKE, PALATAL VIEW.

a Spheno-pterygoid muscle; b ex-
ternal pterygoid muscle; ¢ fascial
sheath of this muscle attached to
the capsule of the gland; d median
ridge of base of skull.

(After Mitchell. )

The elevator muscle of the fang is the
spheno-pterygoid muscle (fig. 15, a), which
arises along the median ridge of the base of
the skull (d), and running backward is in-
serted upon the enlarged posterior end of the
pterygoid bone. The contraction of this
muscle pulls (direction l—m fig. 16) the ptery-
goids forward, which thus push the lower
end of the maxillary forward, the upper end
being held in position by the lachrymal hinge.
The tip of the fang describing part of a cir-
cle, finally points downward instead of back-
ward. The chief retractor muscle, which
antagonizes the elevator muscle by acting
in the opposite direction, is the external
pterygoid (ecto-pterygoid) muscle (fig. 15, b),
which arising from the joint between the
quadrate bone and the lower jaw, runs for-
ward and is inserted on the outside of the
maxillary bone a little below the joint of the
latter with the outer pterygoid bone. It
will be seen that contraction of this muscle

means a pulling backward of the maxillary bone (in the direction p-e
fig. 16), resulting in the backward and upward movement of the point

of the fang.

368 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

The fang itself is a large, very pointed, and curved tooth containing
two cavities, the pulp cavity and the poison canal, the former situated
on the coneave side, the latter on the convex side of the tooth (fig. 20).
The poison canal has a more or less slit-shaped opening near the base,
on the anterior side of the fang, and another slit, narrower and longer
on the same side, some little dis-
tance from the very sharply
pointed tip. Between these open-
ings it is often possible to trace a
more or less well-defined depressed
line. A microscopic inspection of
cross sections of the fang reveals
the fact that the canal is nothing
but a deep groove, the walls of
DIAGRAM OF THE BONES CONCERNED IN RAIST-G which have closed aves it ante-

THE FANG. riorly, the depressed line indicating
oie See cnkc nina oa ee eee
Maret dines ymelnaene c wdaasllare Baneeeneees seam.” This structure of the fang

Cases Mitchell) may be easily understood by com-
paring it to a ieaf curling up in drying, the edges meeting and over-
lapping in the middle, leaving anupper and a lower opening. By making
sections of growing and full-grown fangs of the same individual, the
evolution of the grooved fang into the *‘ perforated” fang is easily traced,
and the inexactness of the latter term clearly demonstrated. As a
consequence of this origin of the canal, it is lined with the same hard
layer of dentine as the outer side of che fang, for it will be seen that
this inner lining of the cana! is in reality the
anterior surface, while the outer layer is only
the posterior surface of the normal tooth. An
inspection of the accompanying figure (fig. 17),
which represents a cross section through the l
upper jaw, with the functional full-grown fang { i)

Fig. 16.

Nip

“\

Ds
followed by the more or less undeveloped reserve i \ Oy Ne y \
fangs, will show this plainiy, as the same prin- i IK Ny LN
ciple is involved in the Pit Vipers. WING ;
As already stated, the fang is above fixed » oe SEG
: s ARRANGEMENT OF THE RESERVE
firmly in the socket of the maxillary bone, ‘‘its WANGS IN RUNGRRUE EE
base being luted to the portion of the bone — CltUs, ILLUSTRATING THE DE-
around its side and anterior aspect,” to borrow Mpa Ram Se) aoe
Dr. Weir Mitchell’s words.* ‘Posteriorly, the — Enlarged.
bone possesses a hollow, in which is lodged the en ae
tooth sac. In the open mouth of this alveolar process, within the mucous
membrane, and upon the pterygoid bone, lie one behind and below

another, the reserve fangs, each smaller than the one in front and less

*Researches upon the Venom of the Rattlesnake. Smithsonian Contributions to
Knowledge. Washington, 1861, p. 16.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 369

and less developed, until the situation of the last which is visible is
marked by a minute papilla slone. I have counted from 8 to 10 of
these on each side. When the fang is lost by natural process,it is
replaced withm a few days; wher violently displaced, several weeks
sometimes elapse before the next fang is fixed firmly enough to be useful
to the snake. If the functiona! fang be lost or shed, the next tooth
gradually assumes its position,” and finally, occupying the place of the
lost one, becomes anchylosed.

In the same manner as the hollow fang is developed from the grooved
fang, and this again from the plain solid tooth, so is the poison gland
evolved from the ordinary salivary gland by a specialization of the
yellow portion of the latter, as already mentioned under the opistho-
glyph snakes.

The typical venom gland is found in its fullest development among
the Pit Vipers, and is located on each side of the head below and behind

Fig. 18.
POISON APPARATUS OF RATTLESNAKE; VENOM GLAND AND MUSCLES.

Lateral view. a@ venom gland; a’ venom duct; ) anterior temporal muscle; b’ mandibular portion
of same; ¢ posterior temporal muscle; d digastricus muscle; e posterior ligament of gland; f sheath
of fang; g middle temporal muscle; h external pterygoid muscle; i maxillary salivary gland; j man-
dibulary salivary gland.

(After Duvernoy. )
the eye. The shape is that of a flattened almond, the pointed end
toward the front and below the eye, tapering to a narrow duct, which
carries the poison to the inlet at the base of the fang. The relative size
of the organ may best be understood by a glance at the accompanying
figure (fig. 18.)

The interior structure of the gland may be described briefly as con-
sisting of a basal cavity into which the small ducts of the glands open.
These ducts run toward the walls of the gland, branching, and finally
ending in minute blind bags, the whole system of ducts being sup-
ported by a network of numerous fine threads and thin sheets of fibrous
tissue. The ducts are lined with a more elongated epithelium, the blind
pouches with angular nucleated epithelial cells.

H. Mis. 184, pt. 2 24

370 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

The external covering of the gland is made up of two more or less
distinct layers of fibrous tissue, the outer one being continued pos-
teriorly in a ribbon-like ligament running backward and inserting itself
upon the joint of the jaw (fig. 18, e). A short ligament on the side
facing the skull attaches the gland firmly
to the latter, and a third one below con-
nects with the external pterygoid muscle
(fig. 15, ¢).

At the anterior end of the gland the cap-
sule continues as the outer covering of the
duet which carries the poison from the gland
to the fang. This duct, in its normal posi-
tion, makes a sudden upward curve (fig. 18,
a) under the eye, descending from which
it follows the posterior wall of the pit and
finally passes over the rounded outer front

Fig. 19.
LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF POISON ,
¥ANG OF BOTHROPS edge of the maxillary bone, at the base of

Enlarged. @ Poison duct entering which it neets the upper opening, or inlet,

the fang at a’; a// opening of poison . . 5 : Beets
canal near tip of fang; D pulp cavity ; ot the canal thi ough the fang.

cdentin; dconnective tissue. Until Prof. Jeffries Wyman, in 1860,

DS ae and, about simultaneously, Dr. Christopher
Johnston, published opinions to the effect that the poison duct does
not enter the canal of the fang, it was generally held that it actually
continued inside of the channel. This Jatter view has been revived
quite recently by Dr. F. Niemann, who not only describes this arrange-
ment, but figures longitudinal and transverse sections
of it as seen by him in a crotaloid snake, Bothrops
lanceolatus.* The longitudinal section is reproduced
here as fig. 19, the transverse one as fig. 20. The latter
shows at a! the poison canal lined with the duct, which,
even inside of the fang is characterized by its epithelial
lining. As this opens up the question again, and nakes

Fig. 20
future research necessary, and as Mr. Niemann seems to Transverse sEc-

be ignorant? of the investigations referred to, it may TON OF BOTH:

) i : ROPS FANG.
be well to quote their evidence a little more fully.

Prof. Wyman’s account of some dissections of the poison apparatus:
2 i
of the Rattlesnake was read at a meeting of the Boston Society of

* Beitriige zur Morphologie und Physiologie der Oberlippendriisen einiger Ophidier.
Wiegmann’s Archiv f. Naturg., Lv, i, pt. 3, Sept., 1892, pp. 262-286 + pl. XIv.

In spite of the apparent conclusiveness of Mr. Niemann’s figures, I am compeiled
to remark that his paper contains several indications of carelessness which makes
it imperative to receive his conclusions with extreme care. That anyone should
attempt an investigation of that kind without knowing and quoting Dr. $8. Weir
Mitchell’s epoch-making labors, is scarcely reassuring in the first place, but there
seems to be even less reason for a confusion of such terms as Solenoglyph for Opis-
toglyph on p. 282, and the mistaken identification of the ectopterygoid bone tor the
maxillary, pp. 277 and 279.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. atl

Natural History, May 16, 1860 (Proceedings, Vol. vi1; published July,
1860, pp. 293-294), and is quite brief, as follows:

The duct proper does not reach the opening at the base of the tooth, but ends at
a short distance from it. The communication beyond this is made by means of the
sheath of the tooth, which is too loose to prevent the poison from escaping around
the exterior of the tooth instead of entering its canal, were it not for the circumstance
that as the tooth is protruded the sheath is crowded back, and thus made to fit
_ tightly the circumference.

Dr. Johnston’s statement is much more elaborate, and includes an
interesting account of the successive growth and advance of the reserve
fangs. It was written by him as early as October 3, 1859, and given
to Dr. Weir Mitchell for publication.*

’ After discussing the probability of a periodical shedding of the fangs
and describing the successive formation and growth of the secondary
or reserve fangs, Dr. Johnston proceeds as follows:

At length the prime fang is removed, if spontaneously, by the atrophy of the pulp,
and, I believe, by erosion of the basal anchylosed portion; if it be broken off by vio-
lence the freedom of the pseudo-socket is accomplished by the same means. And
now the first tooth of reserve is urged forward into a recess in the maxillary bone
directly adjacent to and on the inner side of the fallen fang; and the requisite
advancement is brought about by the developmental vis a tergo of the remaining
reserve pulp, and probably also by the traction in front exerted by the cicatrizing
parts. Itis evident that the fang emerges from its capsule, and that the point and
crown repose in the den, but the base is closely invested with the capsular remains
under the form of a periosteal expansion, which is the mediate bond of union between
the base and the new and shallow socket of the maxilla.

As may be perceived upon examination at this stage, two sockets coexist in the
same jaw, the inner, new one, supporting the recently promoted fang, and the outer,
old, and now vacant one, which is fast becoming disencumbered of the vestiges per-
taining to its former resident. In this maxilla the new fang occupies the innermost
part, having the old socket on the outer side, while in the opposite maxilla, the
older venom fang may be discovered in its normal situation, leaving the recess to its
inner side vacant for the temporary lodgment of its successor. Or, both fangs
being recently fixed to the jaw, the vacuities will both be formed on the outside,
and all the reserve fangs will appear to follow backward and outward in direct line.

Now, let us look at the situation of the poison duct and examine into the mode by
which it is brought into relation with the fang.

The venom duct arising from the gland makes a bend upward, immediately
beneath the eye, then advances forward under the skin as far as the crotaline fos-
sette [pit], and lying upon the maxilla externally, plunges downward, and pierces
the gum in front of the fang, where it terminates in a papilla, which projects slightly
ito the proximal aperture of the tooth. In this position it is maintained by the
gum, which clasps the base laterally and in front with considerable firmness, its
inferior or distal edge encompassing the annular enlargement already alluded to.
Nor is there any other than a mediate application of the poison papilla against the
fang, for, as the whole venom canal of each tooth is really upon the outside of the
organ, no special membrane lines it, which might be continuous with the duct that
discharges into the upper aperture.

Such is the condition of things in an old fang, occupying its normal exterior posi-
tion. But when the tooth drops ont, or is broken, the gum is left entire; or, if its

*Researches upon the Venom of the Rattlesnake, pp. 17-19. (Published January,
1861.)

372 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

exodus has been forced, the gum escapes with laceration only. In either case, how-
ever, the gum remains as a barrier, limiting the progress of the advancing reserve
fang; and while the latter is establishing itself provisionally the gum encircles ib,
ciasps it tenaciously, and brings the poison papilla in opposition withits dental
aperture. As time passes, the new fang moves gradually outward to its permanent
seat; the inner maxillary recess is restored, and the first fang of reserve is again dis-

covered on the inner side of its senior, resting with its pulp attachment in the bot- -

tom of the recess. Thus, the reserve fang has become an adult functioning fang,
nor does its pulp relax its hold until fate or mischance dislodge the now fatally-
armed tooth which it animates.

Dr. Mitchell adds that although it is often, or usually, the case that,
as stated by Dr. Johnston, the first reserve fang enters the semilunar
socket in the maxilla to the inside of the active fang, itis not uncommon
to find the two fixed fangs unsymmetrically

a placed, one on the inner, the other on the outer
Li ~~. _..@ Side, of their respective sockets, or both on the
EN ONS eS inner side; or again, both on the outer side.
es C) 7% He also expressly states that in all other points
ae) a his own researches agree with those of Dr.
ee ® Johnston, and he presents the diagram, here
Oz reproduced (fig. 21), to illustrate their views as
“38 to the direction taken by the new fang in its

‘ progress toward the alveolar socket.
a teaties te ae eats I have previously mentioned the special
CESSION OF THE FANGS. muscles engaged in erecting and depressing the

@ Alveolar socket"? function: “fang. I shall now call, attention, fo miese
ary fang; cits successor; d the . A E
next fang in order of age; eres Which force the poison through the duct into
Me etl asd, the hollow fang.

(After Mitchell. ) ;

In the non-poisonous snakes the closing of the
mouth is effected by the three temporal muscles, the anterior, the
middle, and the posterior. The anterior temporal arises from the
parietal crest and its continuation on the postfrontal bone, turns back-
ward around the joint of the lower jaw and is inserted on the latter
bone; the middle temporal arises from the posterior half of the parietal
crest, runs downward and forward under the former and is similarly
inserted, while the posterior temporal, the strongest of them all, arises
from the quadrate bone and is inserted on the inside of the entire length
of the angular bone of the lower jaw.

In the crotalids this arrangement is considerably modified (fig.
18). The posterior (c) and middle (g) temporal muscles remain essen-
tially as in the non-venomous snakes, and their function is also the
same, viz, by contraction to pull the lower jaw up against the upper
one, or, in other words, to close the mouth. The anterior temporal (0),
however, has now both a different rise and a different function. In-
stead of connecting with the cranial wall, it has lost all connection with
the latter and arises from the upper posterior portion of the firm, tendi-
nous capsule of the poison gland (a), runs backward under the ribbon-
like ligament (e) which fastens the gland to the joint of the jaw, winds

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 373

around this joint and inserts itself (b') broadly upon the lower jaw. It
may easily be shown that a contraction of these muscles will produce a
tremendous pressure upon the poison gland. Itis also apparent that the
closing of the mouth does not necessarily affect the gland, as only the
posterior and middle temporals need be employed in the action, and
that the pressure exerted by the anterior temporal is voluntary, as well
as independent of the closing of the jaw.

While thus the flow of poison is regulated by the pressure upon the
gland, there are additional safeguards against waste of the precious
fluid. Dr: Weir Mitchell has discovered that the visible thickening of
the poison duct anterior to the sudden turn under the eye is due to an
increase in the amount of the fibrous tissue of the walls, and not to any
widening of the canal. As he also found the walls of tne duct at this
place to contain nonstriated muscular tissue, he concludes that the
enlargement is a real ring-muscle, or sphincter, which by its contrac-
tion closes the duct, and he demonstrated the correctness of his con-
clusion by experiments. He found that when in the living and active
Rattlesnake the jaws were separated, and the fangs caught on the edge
of acup and erected, it was usually very difficult to produce a flow of
venom against the will of the snake, even when the operator pressed
upon the glands, but that on the contrary it was easy to force the poison
out along the duct and through the fang, if the snake was dead or insen-
sible from chloroform.

The whole poison apparatus has very appropriately been compared
to:a hypodermic bulb syringe, the needle, with its obliquely cut point
and slit-like outlet, representing the fangs, the bulb corresponding to
the poison glands, and the muscles of the hand which presses the bulb
performing the same task as the anterior temporal muscle.

The nature of the poisonous tluid secreted by the gland in the pit
vipers seems to be almost as diagnostic as the apparatus itself. The
discussion of its properties is so closely connected with the question of
antidotes and remedies that a summary of the interesting results of
Drs. Mitchell and Reichert’s recent studies and discoveries in this field
will be reserved for quotation in the closing chapter of this paper, and
I shall now devote some space to the action of the snake in utilizing
the formidabie weapon which has been described.

The action referred to is not a “bite” pure and simple, it is the com-
bination of a bite and a blow delivered with such lightning rapidity
that it is very difficult, 1f not impossible, for the unaided eye to follow
the various movements composing it and to record their occurrence in
the proper sequence. The testimony furnished by our eyes as to the
movements and sequence involved in an action as familiar and com-
paratively slow as that of a running horse was proven utterly false by
the instantaneous photographs, and it is very likely that there are simi-
lar surprises in store for us when some one shall have rigged up a “ bat-
tery” of cameras and fixed the successive movements of the striking

374 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Rattlesnake on paper in such a manner as to leave no more room for
guesses, interpretations, and disputes.

How desirable such a series of pictures is may well be understood
by a reference to an extended discussion which was carried on in the
well known New York weekly, Forest and Stream, about two years ago.
In the issue for May 26, 1892,* the editor called attention to a state-
ment by the greatest herpetological authority in the country with regard
to the action of the Rattlesnake, and which the editor characterizes as
“very extraordinary.” The statement is to the following effect:

The species of this genus [Crotalus] are of rather sluggish movements, and are not
quick to bite, unless trodden on. They throw the boy into a coil and sound the
rattle, giving a sigmoid flexure to the anterior part of the body, on which the head
is poised with open mouth ready for action. At this time drops of the poisonous
saliva fall from the fangs, and by a violent expulsion of air from the lungs are thrown
at their enemy.t

It is evidently the last half of the account which called forth the

criticism and led the editor to call upon the readers “to contribute
some evidence on the point in question.’’ In the very next number two
observers controvert the statement in decided language. Few men are
such keen observers or have had such opportunities for observation as
Maj. Charles I. Bendire, from whose reply¢ we quote as follows:
, During a residence of more than twenty-five years in the western portion of the
United States, a considerable part of this time having been spent in the field, where
Rattlesnakes were and are still common, and during which time I have seen hun-
dreds of these reptiles, I have never yet observed one with its mouth open when
coiled and ready to strike; neither have I ever seen one attempt to throw poison,
even when teased and much provoked.

The other reader, who signs himself J. M. W., and who evidently has
had some experience with Rattlers, concludes § a similar protest with
the following statement:

While living in southern Ilinois I had a captive nearly 5 feet long—a vicious
fighter, who would strike at any object thrust toward him, and often caught his
curved fangs in the fine wire netting covering the cage, thus holding his open mouth
in position for a fraction of a minute. The venom from each fang, » light amber-
colored fluid in drops about the size of No. 6 shot, could be seen on the gauze where
it collected when he struck, but there was nothing more, no saliva, no spitting or
hissing, nor have Iever seen these manifestations in any of the many individuals
that have come under my immediate notice. Nor have I ever seen a snake’s mouth
open, with fangs exposed, while waiting a chance to strike. When they strike, the
jaws open at an angle of nearly 180 degrees, but not until the final moment.

In the next issue is a very interesting note by Dr. M. G. Ellzey,|| from
which the following sentence is quoted:

Ihave seen Rattlers in coil, and seen them strike from coil very often, but never
saw one holding its mouth open, with erect fangs, dripping poisonous saliva.

Forest and Stream, XXXviil, p. 493.

t Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., x1v, 1891 (No. 882), p. 687.

| Forest and Stream, XXXviul, June 2, 1892, p. 518.
§ Forest and Stream, loe cit.

|| Forest and Stream, Xxxvuil, June 9, 1892, p. 538.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 315

For several weeks similar accounts, some, however, more or less mixed
with decided *‘stiake stories,” appeared in the columns of the paper,*
with one exception, that of “E. D. W. 8.” (June 16, 1892, p. 562), whose
experience in California with a “Black Rattler,” which ‘arched his head
and neck and hissed or blew quite a quantity of froth or spittle,” seems to
prove nothing, as it proves too much. The discussion was finally con-
cluded by Prof: E. D. Cope, who disclaimed having represented in the
paragraph criticised the normal action of the rattler when ready to
strike, as the following quotationt shows:

I did not state that Rattlesnakes always maintain the position described when
about to bite. On the contrary, it is only when prevented from either biting or
running away that they act in the manner mentioned. If a Rattlesnake is annoyed
by being stirred up with a stick and pebbles, etc., thrown at him, and is prevented
from escaping, if he is in good condition and the weather is warm he will some-
times act as I have stated from actual observations made on the Crotalus confluentus
in New Mexico. When the month is opened widely, the masseter muscle compresses
the poison gland, { and, if the latter is full, forces some of it to escape through the
duct, and it drops from the fangs. This is an observation which has been often
made on various venomous snakes. If the snake expels air from the lungs in hiss-
ing, as it generally does when on the defensive, the drops will be thrown out with
the air toward the enemy. I do not suppose, and did not state, that this was done
voluntarily by the snake; it is-simply a necessary consequence of the mechanical
conditions.

Ihavereviewed this controversy so fully because it shows the necessity
of an authoritative account of the normal action of the snake when
striking. During the discussion one writer quoted a few disconnected
passages from Dr. S. Weir Mitchell’s elaborate article on the subject,
but as a clear understanding of the action involved can only be gained
from a detailed account, I have no hesitation in reprinting nearly the
entire chapter devoted by the famous specialist on the rattlesnake and
its poison, e-pecially because the original is now out of print, and
there is no other account equaling it in accuracy and clearness, and
there is not apt to be much added to it or corrected in it until we
shall have the series of photographs alluded to above. His account is
published in the third chapter of his ‘‘ Researches upon the Venom of
the Rattlesnake” (published in 1861 by the Smithsonian Institution as
one of the Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge), entitled *‘The
Physiological Mechanism of the Bite of the Crotalus,” and is to the
following effect: §

When the Rattlesnake is in repose and unmolested, it sometimes lies at length,
sometimes coiled or wrapped fold on fold in the loops formed by other snakes which

*eM. EK. J.” and ‘‘ Whippoorwill,” June 16, p. 562; S.D. Kendall, George H.
Wyman, and “‘W.,” June 23, p.588; ‘‘ Barker,” June 30, p. 610.

t Forest and Stream, xxx1x, August 11, 1892, p. 114.

{The masseter muscle is the same as is above called the temporal muscle. It is
difficult to see how in opening the mouth this muscle can compress the poison gland.
This can only be done by a contraction of the muscle, but this conwaction must
uecessarily close the mouth.

§ Pp. 20-25.

376 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

may happen to be in the same box. So soon, however, as cause is seen for alarm,
the snake extricates itself, if among others, and at once throws its body into the
coil so familiar to any one who bas seen serpents, whether venomous or not: Some-
times on the edge, more often in the center of the coil, the tail projects far enough
to admit of its vibrating freely and with singular swiftness. The head is raised a
little above the rest of the body, but not usually more than 3 or 4 inches, even in
large snakes. The neck and upper end of the trunk are not thrown into complete
circles, but lie in two or three abrupt curves across the mass of the coiled body.
The snake is now in position to strike. While thus at bay, in an attitude of singu-
lar grace, the long black tongue is frequently protruded—a common movement among
all serpents when irritated. Just before the blow the snake makes a hissing sound,
which is caused by the act of expiration, and is due to the passage of air through
the narrow glottis. It is louder in certain innocent serpents than in the crotalus.

The mechanism of the forward cast of the body, which next occurs, is a very
simple matter. The muscles which le upon the convexity of the bending formed
by the upper part of the snake are suddenly and violently contracted, so as abruptly
to straighten the body, and thrust it forward in a direct line. The force resulting
from this motion is not very great, as I have often ascertained when a snake has
struck the end of a pole which I was holding, nor could it alone suffice to bury the
fang in a tough skin were it not for the acts which follow and aid it. In effecting
this forward thrust of the neck and head the serpent employs only the upper part
of its body, and consequently is unable, under any circumstances, to strike at a
greater distance than one-half its length, while usually its projectile range does not
exceed a third of its length. An impression prevails that when the snake lies coiled
its head is raised very high to enable it to strike downward. It seems, however,
to be of no moment in what direction the danger threatens, since it can at will
cast itself forward, downward, or almost directly upward.

As the animal comes within reach, of which the snake «ioes not always judge with
accuracy, the latter executes the movement just described. Atthe instant and while
in motion the jaws are separated widely and the head is bent somewhat back upon
the first cervicai bones, so as to bring the point of the fang into a favorable position
to penetrate the opposing flesh. Owing to the backward curve of the tooth, this of
necessity involves the opening of the jaws to such an extent that an observer stand-
ing above the snake can see the white mucous membrane of the mouth as the blow
is given. The peculiar articulation of the lower jaw upon an intermediary bone in
place of upon the body of the skull greatly facilitates this action. On examining
the neck and head it will also be seen that the head, under the influence of the cer-
vical prolongation of the mass of the spinal muscles, is capable of being bent back-
ward to no inconsidcrable extent. Consentaneously with the forward thrust of the
body and with the opening of the mouth the spheno-pterygoids act from their firm
cranial attachments to draw forward the pterygoid plate, and thus, through its
attachment to the maxillary, to erect the fang. The function of elevating the fang
belongs alone to this muscle, which has no analogue in the other vertebrate animals.
I have frequently tested its power to raise the fang by stimulating it with galvanic
or other irritants, after decapitating the snake, and, although some French observers
seem to have had doubts as to the agencies which effect the elevation and depression
of the fang, there does not seem to me to be any reason to doubt the share which the
spheno-pterygoid takes in this mechanism. That the mere act of opening the mouth
of necessity raises the weapon has often been affirmed, but it is only necessary to
separate the jaws of a crotalus to be convinced that this is not the ease, and that
even when tke mouth is widely opened the animal has the most perfect control over
the movement of the fang, raising or depressing it at will.

As the spheno-pterygoid acts, the maxillary bone rocks forward upon its lachry-
mal articulation. When the motion reaches its limit, and is checked by the liga-
ment which I have described, the supporting lachrymal bone, in turn, yields to the

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA, 377

power applied through the maxillary bone. These movements elevate a little the
muzzle of the snake, so as to give to the face a very singular expression during the
act of striking. Their more obvious and important result is the elevation of the
fang, which, rising, thrusts off from its convexity the cloak-like vagina-dentis so
that it gathers in loose folds at its base (fig. 22.)

As the unsheathed tooth penetrates the flesh of the victim a series of movements
occur, which must be contemporaneous, or nearly so. The body of the snake, still
resting in coil, makes, as it were, an anchor, while the muscles of the neck contract-
ing draw upon the head so violently that when a small animal is the prey it is
often dragged back by the effort here described. If now the head and fang remained

Fig. 22.
PALATE OF THE RATTLESNAKE.
d Fang; e sheath (vagina dentis) covering the fang; f sheath thrown back so as to show the fang;
g palatine teeth. (After Duvernoy. )

passive the pull upon the head would withdraw the fang too soon; but at this
moment the head is probably stayed in its position by the muscles below, or in front
of the spine; while the pterygoideus externus and spheno-palatine acting upon the
tang through their respective insertions, into the posterior apophysis of the sub-
maxillary bone, and the inside of the palate bone, draw its point violently back-
ward, so as to drive it more deeply into the flesh. The muscles alluded to, there-
fore, antagonize the spheno-pterygoid. At this instant occurs a third series of
motions, which result in the further deepening of wound and in the injection of the
poison. The lower jaw is closed upon the bitten part or member. Where the surface
struck is flat and large this action will have but slight influence.

Where the jaw shuts on a small limb or member, the consequent effects will be far
more likely to prove serious, since the power thus to shut the mouth materially aids

378 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

the purpose of the blow. The closure of the jaw is effected by the posterior, middle,
and anterior temporal muscles. ‘The first two tend simply to shut the mouth; the
anterior temporal, however, is so folded about the poison gland that while it draws
up the lower jaw it simultaneously compresses two-thirds of the body of the gland.
This force is applied in such a manner as to squeeze the fluids out of the upper and
back parts of the gland and drive them forward into the duet. The anterior lower
angle of the gland, as well as a portion of the duct, is subjected to similar pressure
_at the same instant, owing to the flat tendinous insertion of a part of the external
pterygoid upon the parts in question. . :

It will thus be observed that the same muscular acts which deepen the wound fix
the prey, and inject the venom through the ducts and into the tissues penetrated by ~
the teeth. The whole process here described at such length is the work of an
instant, and the serpent’s next effort is to disentangle itself from its victim. This
step is effected by relaxing the muscles of the neck so as to leave the head passive,
while the continued traction of the muscles of the body pull upon it, and thus with-
draw the fang, over which glides the elastic mucous sheath as the pterygoid, again
acting, depresses the fang, and the serpent recovers its posture of defense.

It happens, not infrequently, that the teeth of the lower jaw catch in the skin of
the bitten animal, and thus prevent the snake froin retreating at once. When this
takes place the serpent shakes its head from side to side with a motion which so
nearly resembles the shake a dog gives its prey that it has been mistaken by at least
one observer for an expression of rage. It is really an attempt to escape; nor is it
always successful, since a large animal will often drag a snake until the fangs them-
selves break loose and are left in or on the bitten part.

In considering this portion of our subject it is well to notice what has been too
much overlooked, the fact that, while the snake commonly employs both fangs, it
does often inflict but a single wound. When obtaining venom from living snakes,
I have been accustomed to allow them to bite upon the inner edge of a cup, and I
have observed that on some occasions both fangs were used at once, and that on
others only one was active. Or, the fangs were used in succession, an appreciable
interval of time intervening. If this occur when a snake at freedom strikes an
object, it is, of course, possible that the animal may escape before the second fang
is driven in by the traction of its proper external pterygoid muscle. At all events,
it is certain that these facts should receive due appreciation in estimating the dan-
ger of a given bite and the value of an antidote.

There remains for consideration one muscular motion, which I have observed to
accompany the effort to bite when the snake is held by the back of the neck. It
consists ina turning outward of the points of the fangs, so as to separate them
from one another.* This divergence of the fang points is disadvantageous, inas-
much as it causes them to enter somewhat obliquely, and frequently throws one
fang beyond the part bitten, when that part happens to be small. It has a use with
reference to the snake itself, since the fang points, when thus widely separated, lie
oustide of the lower jaw, and are thus prevented from wounding it. This purpose is
greatly aided by the.action of a muscle analogous to the mylo-hyoid, which approxi-
mates the anterior extremities of the lower maxillary, or mandibular bones, so as
to make narrow the extremity of the jaw. The protection thus obtained is very
essential, since the serpent always closes the jaw violently when biting, but does
not always succeed in seizing its prey. Whether or not this divergence of the fang
points oecurs when the snake bites unrestrainedly, I can not say, but as I have been
very often astonished at the distance between the wounds, when both fangs had
taken effect, it is highly probable that it occurs under all circumstances.

The power with which the venom is ejected from the tooth depends somewhat
upon the amount contained in the gland and its ducts. When the snake fails to

*T could not determine whether this divergence took place when the snake, at
freedom, struck an animal.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 379

strike the object aimed at the poison is sometimes projected several feet. In one
case which is known to me, it was thrown into the eye of a man standing 5 or 6 feet
from the snake, when it struck upward at a stick held above its coil.

The study of the complicated mechanism which we have endeavored to explain
will aid us in understanding several points of interest in connection with the bite
of the rattlesnake.

It must be perfectly apparent that in a sequence of movements so elaborate it will
occasionally happen that, from a failure in some one of the essential motions, the
ultimate purpose of the whole will be interfered with. -Thus, it sometimes chances
that the serpent miscalculates the distance. and fails from this cause. Or, again,
when the object aimed at is very near, the initial force of the blow is lost, and the
tooth does not enter; no uncommon occurrence, where the animal struck is an old dog
with a tough skin. Again, if the upper jaw be not elevated sufficiently, the fangs
are sometimes driven backward, by the force of the forward impulse, as they touch
the part attacked, and the venom is then apt to escape between the tooth and the
covering mucous cloak. Upon one occasion, having allowed asmall snake to strike
a dog, the former became entangled, owing to the hooked teeth of the lower maxil-
lary bone having caught in the skin. Upon examining the snake closely, the dog
being held, I found that the convexity of the fangs lay against the skin, on which
were thrown one or two drops of venom. On removing the snake, and inspecting
the part struck, I could findno fang wound, although the skin was visibly torn by
the smaller teeth. I have seen the rattlesnake strike with great apparent ferocity,
a number of times, when I have been unable to discover any fang wound whatso-
ever, ani this has taken place, occasionally, with small animals, such as the rabbit,
which must have been seriously effected by even a small amount of venom.

It scarcely ever happens that an animal is bitten without a part of the injected
venom being cast on the skin near the wound made by the fangs. This wasted
material probably escapes from the duct, where it is in opposition with the lower
opening of the fang canal, and may be Sate that excess of fluid which the fang
can not carry. In some cases, however, it is quite possible that the relations of the
fang and the duct are so disturbed that the venom never enters the tooth at all. It
is certainly true, as has been already stated, and as Dr. Wyman has shown, that the
fang must be fully erected in order that the duct shall be so firmly held in contact
with the fang, as to insure the passage of the venom through this latter organ.

Finally, it sometimes happens that the blow is given, the fang enters, and from
the quick starting of the animal injured, or from some other interrupting cause, it
is withdrawn so soon that the larger portion of the poison is thrown harmless upon
the surface nearthe wound. Under these circumstances, the resulting syinptoms are,
of course, trifling, and how well such an occurrence would be calculated to deceive
the observer, who employed an antidote in a like case, can be readily conceived.

In amore popular paper* Dr. Mitchell remarks that the nervous
inechanism which controls the act of striking seems to be in the spinal
cord, for if we cut off a snake’s head and then pinch its tail the stump
of the neck returns and with some accuracy hits the hand of the experi-
menter if he has the nerve to hold on. A little Irishman who took care
of the doctor’s laboratory astonished him by coolly sustaining the test,
but did it by closing his eyes and so shutting out for a moment the too
Suggestive view of the returning stump. Inthe memoir previously
quoted, on the other hand, he mentions that in one or two instane*s
persons who were ignorant of the possibility of this movement have
been so terrified at the blow which has greeted them as to faint on the

€ “Century Miioamne. XXXVIII, eae 1889, pp. 503-514.

380 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

spot. The educated public which has seen so many wonderful tales
concerning snakes disproved have in turn become skeptical about almost
everything told about them not of the most commonplace character.
Hence, the somewhat ironical introduction to the following story, which
made its round through the daily press of the country, and which is no
doubt correct in every particular:

Prof. Brewer, of Yale, recently told a good snake story. Years ago he was in Cali-
fornia and had his tripod and other surveyor’s instruments in the field. Stepping
along in the bushes he felt 1 movement under his feet, and found that he was stand-
ing on a 4}-foot Rattlesnake—a large, vicious and fighting fellow. But the snake
was so pinioned that he could not strike the thick boot that held him fast. Prof.
Brewer held the rattler’s head down with his tripod and cut it off. Then he
cut off his rattles. Stepping aside, he saw the body of the snake, partly coiled,
lying very still. ‘l'aking out his rule to measure its length, the professor took hold
of the serpent to straighten hiim out.

“Quick as an electric shock,” said Prof. Brewer, ‘‘that headless snake brought the
bloody stump over and struck a hard blow upon the back of my hand.” He added:
“7 knew that his head was off and that he could not poison me, but that quick and
hard blow of the rattler made my hair stand on end.”

However, the most dramatic incident of this kind is undoubtedly Mr.
George Catlinm’s adventure on the Rio Trombute, one of the tributaries
of the Amazon River in South America. The story as told by Mr.
Catlin’s companion * is to the effect that Mr. Catlin having shot at the
head of a huge Rattlesnake had apparently missed it, as the snake was
seen to strike and hit him in the breast, where it left a bloody spot on
the shirt. The dress was torn open and one of his half-breed ecompan-
ions prepared to suck the poision out of the supposed wound; but
looking a moment for the puncture, he got up, and with a smile of
exultation he said, ‘‘There’s no harm; you'll find the snake without a
head.” In the weeds near-by the snake was found, closely coiled up,
where he had fallen, with his headless trunk erect and ready for another
spring, the head having been shot off.

If we make some allowance for the necessarily high coloring of the
narrative and the exaggeration almost inseparable from an account of
an occurrence so strange and exciting, there seems to be no good rea-
son to doubt that it took place in the main as related.

Beyond the “pit” there is but little to distinguish the Pit Vipers as
a Whole from the other vipers, and, beyond the poison apparatus and
the changes in the various organs of the head directly or indirectly
connected with this apparatus, they differ not materially from the bulk
of the snakes. One group of the pit vipers possesses, however, an
organ quite unique, not only among the vipers, but among all the snakes
as well, so that it seems the better plan to treat of it in the present con-
nection instead of later on under the head of that particular group. I
refer to the ‘‘rattle” of the Rattlesnakes.

*See Catlin’s, ‘‘Life amongst the Indians” (New York; Appleton & Co., 1867),
pp. 247-249.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 381

It may seem superfluous to describe this well-known instrument in
detail, but as the internal structure may not be clear to everybody, and
as without such a knowledge it will be difficult to explain the develop.
mentand use of this organ, we are obliged to investigate it more closely.

It will be seen (figs. 23, 24) that the tail end of the Rattlesnake instead
of gradually tapering to a point covered by a cone-shaped more or less

Fig. 23.
PERFECT RATTLE OF A LARGE BANDED RATTLESNAKE,
Side view. Three-fourths natural size.
( After Garman, )

acute scale, as in most other snakes, continues rather thick to where
the rattle is appended. The rattle itself in its perfection is shown in
the above figures, and appears externally to consist of a series of
strongly compressed horny rings joined rather loosely together, the
terminal one, the so-called “button,” ending in a compressed, somewhat
cone-shaped cap, which is set off from the basal swelling by a slight
constriction.

Fig. 24.
LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF RATTLE, \

The upper and lower outlines of the rattle will be seen not to be
straight but curved lines, the tendency of the joints to sag downward
by their own weight being counteracted by the fact that the width of
each ring is greater at the lower edge of the rattle than at the upper.
Mr. Quelch, the director of the museum in Georgetown, Demerara, has
shown that the object of this arrangement is to protect the rattle

Fig. 25.
SEPARATE SEGMENTS OF DISJOINTED PERFECT RATTLE OF CROTALUs.
side view.
« button; h basal joint.
(After Czermak. )

against injury and moisture when the snake is moving over the ground
by keeping the somewhat delicate instrument automatically raised.

In order to study the internal structure of the rattle so as to learn
how the various joints are linked together we will have to either pull
them apart separately (fig. 25) or make a longitudinal section through

382 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

the organ (fig. 24). It is then seen that each “ring” is in reality a
“button” that fits over and conceals the terminal portion of the fore-
going (proximal) joint, leaving exposed only the basal swelling, the
ring. The joints are consequently a series of partly overlapping thin
horny capsules or “cones.” These “cones” have a wavy outline con-
sisting of two or three swellings and two constrictions. It will also be
observed that the free edge of the cone is bent inward and fits into the
basal groove of the preceding cone, so that the basal swelling of the
more distal cone clasps around the second swelling of the one nearer
the body. The opening being narrower than this swelling, the two cones
are effectually linked together by means of a kind of restricted ball-
and-socket articulation, modified by the shape of the joints.

It will furthermore be noted, upon actually dissecting the tail end
of the body, that the basal cone of the rattle forms the horny cover of
a Strong thickening of the skin which, in turn,
envelops a more or less cone-shaped compressed
bone. This bone terminates the vertebral col-
umn, being in fact the 7 or 8 last vertebre en-

Fig. 26. : ee
TAIL END OF EMmnvo or mas, larged and fused together imiovoue:
SASAUGA. Upon this dermal thickening surrounding the
Side view. Three times . . .
bapenal tice! terminal bone, the epidermal horny capsule is
(After Garman. ) evidently formed. The latter, in the same man-

ner as the rest of the epidermis in the snakes, in the course of its
growth becomes detached from the secretory iayer, and a new epiderm
is formed beneath it, but while on the rest of the body this renewal of
the outer skin results in the well-known process of sloughing, the peeu-
liar shape of the horny capsule of the end of the body and its greater
thickness and strength prevents its slipping off
in the same manner. It is consequently pushed
out from the end of the tail closely clasping
around the median constriction of the new cone
which now appears externally as the basal “ring.” Fig. 27.

Prof. Samuel Garman has carefully worked out Cree oe ee
and beautifully illustrated the successive stages
of the growth of the rattle from the first indication in the embryo to
the perfected organ in the full-grown snake, and from his paper* the
following account is mainly taken:

In very early embryos of the Ground Rattlesnake, Sistrurus milia-
rius, some of them already 3 inches long, the tail was not yet furnished
with scales, though the entire body was well provided. Outwardly
the tail was short, thick, blunt, slightly compressed, but with no indica-
tion of the characteristic feature so prominent after birth. Embryos
of a nearly allied species, the Massasauga, S. catenatus, however, which
were older and twice as large, showed a distinet promise of the future
rattle in the shape and size of the terminal eap, or button (figs. 26, 27),

*The Rattle of the Rattlesnake. Bulletin Mus. Comp. Zodl. Harv. Coll., x1,
No. 10, pp. 259-268, pls. 1, 11. August, 1888.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 383

which is as yet incomplete and but little more than half what it ulti-
mately becomes. There are now scales on the tail, but they show no
fusion with the button around its front border. Within the button the
vertebre are still distinct and surrounded by muscle. The next step
is illustrated by one-week-old young ones of the same spec les (figs. 28, 29),
$3 inches in length, which show a decided gain, the externally visible

PUTT

Fig. 28. Fig. 29.
TAIL END OF ONE-WEEK-OLD MASSASAUGA. DIAGRAMMATIC LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF FIG, 28.

Side view. Nearly three times natural size.
(After Garman. )

part of each ring having been now acquired. In no case is there any
disposition on the part of the scales to fuse with the button. Inside
of the latter the changes have been even greater; the vertebra, still
plainly outlined, have consolidated into a single elongate mass, the
size of which is being increased by both lateral and terminal ane

the vertical processes have grown together; and the muscles have ra
displaced by the enlarging bone and the thickening skin. Figs. 30
and 31 finally show us the status of a 14-inch-long Prairie Rattlesnake,

<aonn Cia abe

Fig. 30. Fig. 31
INCIPIENT RATTLE OF YOUNG PRAIRIE RATTLE- DIAGRAMMATIC LONGITUDINAL SECTION THROUGH
SNAKE. FIG. 30,

Side view. 14 natural size.
(After Garman )
Crotalus confluentus, which was taken, with the third button about
half grown, when the process of pushing back the second ring was
well under way. The first ring had been set free with the first slough,
holding only by the collar, and if the snake had been allowed to live a
little longer, the second sloughing would have discovered the third
button perfected, clasped by the second ring, the latter pushed back
and loosened from the balance of the epidermis.

It should be added that the period of appearance of the first joints
seems to vary, inasmuch as there are apparently trustworthy records of
embryos having been found with more than one joint.* It is interest-
ing, in this connection/to remember Dr. Hay’s observation that hognose
Snakes commenced to shed their skin within a few minutes after having
left theegg.t As the young Rattlesnake leaves the egg covering before
being born, may it not also occur that it sheds its skin before birth—
at ea8t, sometimes? ~

* Ho ey Saabee: 1882, . 299, tProc. U. S. Nat. Mus., xv, 1892, p. 394.
pley, i! ; I

384 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

How hard it is to overcome a popular error which has once taken
hold of the public mind is strikingly exemplified in the matter of the
growth of the rattle. It was observed long ago, and commented upon
by competent observers and scientists, that the common belief that each
ring on a Rattlesnake’s rattle represents a year of its life, and that its
age consequently can be ascertained by simply counting the number of
rings, is entirely erroneous. Still, the belief. is so common that every
scientific writer who treats of Rattlesnakes finds it necessary to repeat
the (in print) threadbare denunciation of this fallacy, but evidently
without the slightest effect so far as the general public is concerned,
for the next newspaper report of the latest Rattlesnake killed in the
neighborhood, and the newest edition of certain “popular” natural
histories, repeat the same old fallacy. I do not expect to have better
success than my predecessors in this respect, though it would not seem
to be difficult to make people understand that the rattle is a delicate
instrument which easily breaks; that old and huge Rattlers are often
found with but one or a few rings; that a variable number of joints are
added each year; and that the production of a ring can be accomplished
in the course of every two or three months.

On the other hand, it is often asserted by good scientific authorities
that a new joint is formed at each general sloughing of the skin.
Schlegel * seems to have been the first to suggest thisidea, which has
been indorsed, among others, by Garman, who says (op. cit., p. 259) that
the Rattlesnakes differ from other snakes “in retaining a portion of

each slough, that covering the tip of the tail, to form one of the rings
of the rattle.”

It has already been shown that the formation of the rings, or but-
tons, is a process of sloughing analogous to, or rather identical with,
that of the rest of the outer skin, but this does not necessarily imply
that the sloughing takes place at the same time, or that a new button is
formed every time a sloughing of the skin takes place. Recent obser-
vations by a prominent Russian investigator, Dr. A. E. Feoktistow,
seem to indicate that the two processes are, to some extent at least,
jndependent. His conclusions are sufficiently important to warrant
the following quotations from his paper: ft

In June, 1887, 1 received ten living specimens of Crotalus durissus, which I have
since been able to observe closely. Owing to want of a sufficient quantity of suita-
ble food (the animals refused to eat anything but very young rabbits), I lost five of
them in the course of the first six months. The remainder are in good condition,
and now (August 16, 1888) devour birds in addition to rabbits. They live ina large
terrarium provided with a spacious water reservoir, cement floor, and a permanent
hot-water heating apparatus which renders it possible to maintain the temperature
of the air in the interior at 20° to 22° R (=77° to 81.5° F). The snakes are provided
with livi ue food in sufficient epundAney and are eaually liv ely in winter and summer.

* Essai sur la pinarictnn Hes serpens, 1837, 1a 10) B57.

+t Zur Physiologie der Klapper des Crotalus durissus. Bull. Acad. Se. St. Péters-
bourg (n. s.) I, 1889, pp. 1-4. Also.in Mél. Biol. Acad. Sc. St. Pétersb., x11, livr. 1,
1891, pp. 1-4. Translated in Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (6) x1, Jan., 1893, pp. 54-58.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NROTH AMERICA. 385

This opportunity has enabled me to make accurate observations upon the growth,
falling off, and renewal of the rattle. I am in the fortunate position of having been
able to make certain observations upon healthy specimens with good appetites,
which decide these questions.

In five of my snakes the long rattles fell off independently at different times, and
I was now able especially to observe how rapidly these redevelop. I would first,
however, remark that it is perfectly natural for the rattle of the Rattlesnake to fall
off periodically or at irregular intervals, for the organ in question consists of dead,
horny tissue, developed into the well-known hollow ‘ cones,” which, while partly
inclosing one another to form the rattle, are yet only somewhat loosely connected
together. Now, it may be readily understood that such a series of links, when it
attains a certain length, is greatly exposed to mechanical injury, and, consequently,
may easily break off. Without any harm to the snake itself, this chain may be also
cut off or torn off by force. This is, indeed, the simple reason why the rattle never
becomes particularly long, and rattles with 15 to 18 joints are rare. Asa rule, the
rattle only lasts long enough to become 8 or 9 jointed.

As I have already stated, I was able to follow the reproduction of the rattles in
the case of five of the Rattlesnakes which had lost these organs. So long as their
rattles remained short, the snakes were naturally also unable to make a noise. But
the joints were gradually replaced, and in such a way that in all cases, in the course
of from three to four months, two new ones were added to the remaining (now termi-
nal) joint. Three-jointed rattles like these produced already a fairly loud sound.
In the course of a year the rattles developed into chains with from 5 to 6 joints, and
were then capable of producing the usual intense rattling sound. The reproduc-
tion of the rattles had no connection with the recurring sloughing of the skin. It
is well known that the epidermis is shed without the rattle, separating close to the
margin of the latter, and, indeed, in such a way that the end of the tail in the cast
skin is represented by an aperture with finely notched edges corresponding to the
rows of scales.

It consequently follows from my observations that a joint of the rattle can be
produced in the course of every two to three months (during winter, autumn, and
spring, of course by means of artificial warmth, the growth of the rattle evidently
proceeding much more slowly in the natural state), and I do not understand why
other observers have not noticed the growth of the rattle in captive Rattlesnakes,
Probably the snakes were kept under conditions unfavorable for their welfare,
whereby the vital processes were checked. Perhaps, too, the observations were not
conducted with sufficient care.

Dr. Feoktistow’s strictures upon previous observers are not quite well
founded, for Dr. Holbrook has recorded, as early as 1838, that he knew
two joints to have been added in one year, and that Dr. Bachman had
observed four produced in the same period.* It has also been stated
before that Dr. Cotton, of Tennessee, “hada Rattlesnake which shed
its skin on an average twice a year, and he observed a new link to the
rattle on each shedding.” t

The observations made by the Russian naturalist do not in all parti-
culars agree with those of a somewhat later investigator, whose facilities
were not inferior. On the contrary, Mr. J. J. Queleh, who conducted
his experiments with snakes born in confinement in the museum in

*N. Am. Herpet., 1 ed., 11, 1838, p. 85; 2ed., 111, 1842, p. 14,
t Hopley, Snakes, 1882, p. 298.
H. Mis. 184, pt. 2

25

386 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Georgetown, Demerara, consequently in a tropical climate and the
home of the snakes, must be said to have had even superior advantages.
In a very interesting paper published in “ Timehri,”* of which he is
editor, he gives as his experience that the sloughing, or exuviation, of
the general skin and that of the terminal button, or cap, of the tail
forming the new rattle joint take place at the same time and are part
of the same process. It is consequently possible that Feoktistow’s
results may have been caused by irregularities of the sloughing process,
due to the captivity. Out of twenty-four specimens bred in a cage in
the museum, Mr. Quelch brought two up on mice till they reached a
length of more than 3 feet, when the paper was written. Here is an
abstract of his account relating to these specimens:

At birth they were from 9-10 inches in length and } to 4inch thick, and like the
other 22 of the set possessed but a terminal, elongated, horny, stump, though under
the termination of the scales an anterior piece was to be observed. Now, 16 months
after, they are more than two feet in length and more than an inch thick—one,
which has throughout been the more voracious, being somewhat longer and thicker
than the other—and the larger one possesses a rattle of four separable links, while
the other has six of these, but the individual links considerably smaller than those
of its brother. In the case of the smaller snake, with six pieces in the rattle, these
correspond with each exuviation, the rattle being perfect, and bearing the terminal
elongated stump with which it was born. In the other, with four, three terminal
links have been lost, these having been detached during its sixth exuviation.
During 16 months, therefore, the one has had seven exuviations, and the other and
smaller but six.

In a later note, supplementary to the above (op. cit., pp. 170-171), Mr.
Quelch adds the following:

Since writing the foregoing paper it has been possible, from actual observation of
these young forms, te trace the development of the rings still further. On February
5th the larger of the two young specimens was about 24 feet in length and possessed
four rattle rings. Since then two exuviations have taken place, oneon Wednesday,
March 25th, when an extra ring was added to the rattle, thus making five; and
again, about two months after, on May 27th, when the sixth ring was added. In
the case of the smaller snake, which on February 5th wasabout 1 feet in length,
two exuviations have also taken place, at intervals also of about two months between
each exuviation. On February 28th an extra ring was added by change of skin;
and again on May 4th, when 8 rattles were registered in total number. It is note-
worthy that in the larger specimen of these two young ones there are only six
rings, three having been lost in early changes, while in the smaller specimen there are
eight, the total number from birth being retained, as shown by the presence of the
original terminal button with which they were born. The larger specimen is now
(June 11th) about 3} feet in length, while the smaller is about 2} feet. During early
life these vipers are thus, with free diet, observed to exuviate and thus add to the
rings of the rattles every two months.

Dr. Feoktistow, where he speaks of rattles with from 15 to 18 joints
as being rare, adds in a footnote that “rattles of 42 joints, as figured
by Seba, surely exist only in the imagination.” There is said, however,
to be a later account and figure of a rattle of no less than 44 joints,

*The Rattlesnake.—-The Growth of the Rattle. Timehri (n.s.), Vv, pt. 1, June,
1891, pp. 1-11+-plate.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 387

viz, in the “‘ Columbian Magazine or Monthly Miscellany ” for November,
1786, as follows:

The common number of fibule seldom exceeds 14 or 15 in a rattle; but the one
given (fig. 4) is certainly a very great curiosity, even to a person who has seen a
great number of this genus of snakes. The fibule are 44 in number. The snake
from which this rattle was taken was not, as might be expected, of a size propor-
tionate to the prodigious length of its rattle, but rather of a middling-sized snake.
_It was killed some time in the summer of this year, at Fort Allen. *

The most plausible explanation seems to be that some practical joker
joined several rattles, thus deceiving the unwary paragrapher.t The
greatest number of joints recorded so far by a fully trustworthy
authority is, I believe, 21 as seen by Holbrook (N. Am. Herpet., 1 ed.,
11, p. 85), unless we accept Miss Hopley’s somewhat vague statement,
possibly only made on hearsay, that ‘a Crotalus [species not given|
at the London Reptilium had twenty-five links at one time” (Snakes,
p. 301), or Catesby’s figure of a C. horridus with 24 joints. (Carolina,
1748, 11, pl. xli.)

If the reader will again examine the representation of a perfect and
full-grown rattle, given above (fig. 23), it will be seen that the basal
rings are nearly equal in size, while the terminal ones rapidly diminish
in size toward the tip. The latter were, of course, formed during the
early years ot the snake’s life, when its growth was rapid, the increas-
ing size of each succeeding joint testifying to the corresponding increase
of thickness of the end of the tail. Later on this increase is much
slower and the new joints do not materially differ in diameter from the
preceding one. If, therefore, in the adult snake the rattle breaks
near the base, the new rattle which will grow out to succeed the lost
one will have an entirely ditferent shape, the upper and lower outlines
being nearly parallel and the terminal button as large as the basal
ring, while the perfect, unbroken rattle tapers off toward a small and
rather elongate button. This difference between the parallelogrammic
rattle and the tapering rattle was once held to indicate specific differ-
ences and was used as a systematic character, but Garman has effec-
tually disposed of this notion in the paper on the rattle so often referred
to above. .

When crawling over the ground the rattle, as shown in fig. 23. is
carried with the greatest width vertical and somewhat raised off the
ground, so as to prevent it from dragging.

It is often sounded even in this way, but the usual position assumed
by the snake when vibrating the rattle in earnest is when coiled up and

* Quoted from DeKay, Zool. N. Y., 111, 1892, p.56, footnote. Of course, we place no
more credence in the story of the man who told Kalm that in his younger days he
had killed a Rattler with 30 joints than in the one quoted above. (Kalm, Svenska
Vetensk. Acad. Handl., x111, 1752, p. 316.)

{A correspondent recently informed the Smithsonian Institution that he was in
possession of a ‘ fossil rattle” of about 45 joints. The fossil, when received, proved
to be an Orthoceras, a mollusk of the Devonian age,

388 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

ready for defense or offense. The rattle is then as a rule raised nearly
vertically in the middle of the coil, though it not only can, but really
does, rattle with the instrument poised outside of the body rings. When
shown the original drawing of the Banded Rattlesnake, now reproduced
on pl. 9, a friend of mine criticised the position as unnatural, since in
his opinion the snake could not sound the rattle outside of the coil.
Fortunately I had a huge live Texas Rattler, Crotalus atrox, near by,
and upon repairing to the cage and trying to induce the monster to
rattle, his very first performance was given in the position shown in the
criticised illustration.

The rattling sound is produced by a vigorous shaking and vibrating
of the end of the tail, the dead, horny cones producing a noise of dif-
ferent pitch and volume dependent upon the size and vigor of the ani-
mal and the dryness of the rattle. Under ordinary circumstances the
sound is not kept up constantly for any length of time, but that is not
tor want of ability, for it is well known that captive Rattlesnakes may
be induced to rattle continuously for hours.

Dr. Feoktistow, in the memoir aiready quoted, has given an account
of an interesting experiment made for the purpose of ascertaining the
number of vibrations which the rattle makes per minute, which deserves
to be reproduced here:

A large Rattlesnake was grasped by the neck, while an assistant thrust a needle
through the middle joint of its seven-jointed rattle in such a way that it pierced
the rattle in its greatest diameter, consequently from avove downward, if we imag-
ine the snake lying quiet with its tail outstretched upon the ground. Now, since
the rattle (in the position in which we have supposed the snake to be) is, in making
a noise, moved from left to right and back again, the needle was able to trace curves
of vibration upon paper blackened with soot. As a registering apparatus I used
Dudgesn’s polygraph, with a strip of blackened paper which was made to slide rap-
idly forward by means of the clockwork. The tail of the snake was, to a certain
extent, fixed by my holding the suake with my hand in the region in front of the
vent. After much trouble I succeeded in bringing the needle in a suitable manner
into contact with the strip of paper, and in obtaining curves of vibration, from
which the number of the vibrations per minute (the rapidity of the progression of
the strip of paper being known) could be calculated with a fair degree of accuracy.
In this manner it was found that the movements of the rattle are composed of vreat
vibrations of the entire tail itself and of smaller vibrations of the actual rattle in
such a way that the tail makes 75 and the rattle, on the other hand, 110 vibrations
per minute. These are approximate average numbers, since I was able to obtain
only faulty curves, because the rattle does not perform its vibrations precisely in one
plane. Movements kept up for hours with rapidity like this are absolutely amazing.
When observed with the naked eye, only a blurred image is seen of the rattle moy-
ing at this rate.

The Russian investigator was not the first, however, to attempt a
determinution of the vibrations of the Rattlesnake’s tail. Dr. Isaae
Ott, as early as 1882, tried an experiment similar to that of Dr. Feok-
tistow. From his statement* it may be sufficient to quote the fol-

New York (n. s.), vil, Jan.—Oct., 1882, pp. 514-516.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 389

The snake experimented with was one which had been kept about nine months, and
was not as energetic as one recently caught, but the note of his rattle was as usual.
His head was secured by means of a wire around the neck, and at the end of his rattle
was attached a short piece of thin copper wire by means of sealing wax; then the
tail was taken in hand and the point of the copper pen directed against the smoked
revolving drum of a Marey-Secretan apparatus. A tuning fork was run over the
drum to determine the rate of movement of the drum. By an analysis of the curve
it was found that the rate of vibration of the tail was about 60 per second.

Dr. Ott, it should be added, admits the possibility that the number of
vibrations recorded are less than the actually normal number. Remem-
bering the fact that the snake experimented upon was less than nor-
mally energetic, the result agrees tolerably well with that obtained by
Feoktistow seven years later.

The question, ‘For what purpose does the snake rattle?” is still an
unsolved one. Possibly it will ever remain so if we continue to look
for one single purpose which may be considered so important in the
animal’s economy as to have brought about development of such a
specialized instrument. Philosophers when attempting to explain
the utility to the snake of acquiring the rattle have often failed,
because it seemed evident that the rattle, so far from being useful
to the snake, in most cases appears to be a disadvantage, which
has led to the almost total extinction of the Rattlersin the cultivated
and more densely inhabitated districts of the country. It must not
be forgotten, however, that the rattle was evolved long before man
appeared upon the stage, and that the question of its disadvanta-
geousness in the struggle against his supremacy could have no influence
upon its evolution. The history of evolution is full of similar examples
of animals having acquired an advantageous character which, when
new enemies appeared, was turned against the owner because it could
not be undone or modified to suit the new conditions, thus leading
directly to his extermination.

The theories of the use of the rattle are numerous, even though we
exclude from the discussion the one that it is “a providential arrange-
ment to prevent injury to innocent animals and man.”

An interesting discussion of this question was started by Prof. N.S.
Shaler about twenty years ago, in a paper entitled “The Rattlesnake
and Natural Selection,” * in which he receded from the position previ-
ously held by him that “the tail appendage o! the Rattlesnake was not
to be explained on the doctrine of natural selection, inasmuch as it could
contribute in no way to the advantage of the animal.” Having once him-
self in the field mistaken the rattling for the sound made by the “locust,”
Cicada rimosa, Say, he conceived the idea that the object of the noise
is to decoy insect-eating birds “ into the range of the serpeni’s spring”
by an imitation of the cicada’s sound, and he consequently admitted
that the case of the Rattlesnake did no longer seem “the bar to the
acceptance of the theory it once did.”

* American Naturalist, v1, 1872, pp. 32-37.

390 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1898.

The similarity of the rattling sound to that of certain grasshoppers
has been commented on by many writers both before and since, and is
indeed in many cases astonishingly deceptive; but there are several
great difficulties about this theory, chief of which are that birds seem
to form a very small portion of the Rattlesnake’s diet, and that on the
other hand the birds do not seem to rely principally on their ear in
hunting grasshoppers.

Prot. F. W. Putnam (op. cit., pp. 693-694) took issue with Prof. Shaler,
and suggested that the true function of the rattle is most likely to serve
to call the sexes together. This theory received shortly after valuable
support from an observation made by Prof. Samuel Aughey, who
recorded* his experience while surveying in July, 1869, along the Logan
River in Wayne County, Nebraska.

While washing a collection of unios at the water’s edge [he writes] 1 heard the
familiar rattle of the Massasauga (Crotalophorus tergeminus [—Sistrurus catenatus]). I
quickly crept up the bank and cautiously looking over the level bottom I saw, at
the distance of about 30 feet, a rattlesnake coiled up-with the head erect and gazing
in an opposite direction from my position. Every three or five minutes the snake
would cease rattling for a minute or more and then commence again. In about half
an hour from the time that I first saw the snake I observed another Rattlesnake
approach the first one. Closer and closer the second one approached, until at length

they met and indulged inasexual embrace. I watched them for at least an hour and
left them at last without disturbing them.

He also related an instance where three Rattlesnakes made their
appearance on the scene of a battle between hogs and another Rattle-
snake, apparently called in by the rattling of the latter.

The same observer also hints at another use of the rattle, suggesting
that the noise may possibly frighten and thus paralyze the victim into
submission, at the same time explaining the phenomena which by other
observers have been attributed to a peculiar ‘‘charming” power sup-
posed to be possessed by these reptiles, and of which we shall hear
more further on.

The theory which appears most commonly accepted nowadays is one
which was elaborated by J. G. Henderson, in a reply t to Shaler’s arti-
cle above referred to. He advanced the idea that the sounding of the
rattle, so far from inviting the destruction of the snake,

is one of the most effective means of self-protection, and is as useful to it in the
race for life as is the growl of the tiger when threatened with danger. ‘The snake
does not sound its rattles until it considers itself discovered, and not then unless it
apprehends danger. It throws itself in position to strike and says in unmistakable
language, ‘‘Look out, I am ready for you!” If pushed upon, it makes its leap at its
antagonist, and again throws itself in position to renew the conflict, and again
sounds the note of defiance.’ * * * The ability of the snake to defend itself does
not consist in its strength or size, or in its power of overcoming its adversary by a
prolonged conflict, for most of its enemies are its superior in size and strength. Nor

t Useof the Rattle of the Rattlesnake. American Naturalist, v1, 1872, pp. 260-263.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 391

attacked, but, in most cases, the victim, after the deadly stroke is given, may still
revenge itself by the destruction of the snake. But the certainty of the effect of the
poison serves as a warning and is advantageous, not in defense after the attack is
made, but in preventing an attack from being made.

The point here made is certainly a strong one, and the theory has
been given a further application by the consideration, especially advo-
cated by Garman,* that inasmuch as the success of the snake in cap-
ture of food depends on an ever-ready supply of poison, the rattling
sound is advantageous if it keeps away disturbers which can not serve
as food and thus prevents useless expenditure of venom or even the
breaking of the fangs.

If we now look at the various explanations given, it seems possible
to accept them all as partly true. The rattle having once been
acquired it seems even probable that the snake used the sound for the
various purposes indicated, though of course it may be difficult to
point out which one has mostly influenced the evolution of the instru-
ment. To me the rattling appears as a substitute for a voice, and I
think it is quite logical to conclude that it may be put advantageously
to all the uses to which an animal may apply its voice.

It has long been known that most snakes when agitated produce a
whirring or rustling sound, which often strongly resembles the noise
of the Rattlesnake, by rapidly vibrating the end of the tail among dead
leaves, or against some other object, even their own body. Many an
innocent snake has, on this account, suffered an untimely death, having
been mistaken for the deadly rattler. This fact has been used as an
argument in faver of the preventive theory, since, if the rattling is
advantageous to the rattlesnake in preventing attack by its enemies,
the imitation of the noise must also preve advantageous to the mim-
ickers. The fact that this pseudo-rattling is indulged in by the deadly
snakes without a rattle does not mitigate against this theory of imita-
tion, for of course, if it is advantageous to the rattlesnake to have a
means of preventing unneccessary waste of poison or useless exposure
to breakage of the fangs, the imitation must be equally advantageous
to the Copperhead or the Moccasin. But the futility of the theory is
Shown not only in the fact that this vibration of the tail is so universal,
but still more so because it does not seem to be confined to the snakes
of America, to which part of the world the Rattlesnakes are restricted.

It is evident, then, that this vibrating of the tail, so far from being an
imitation of the rattlesnake’s way of making itself heard, was a common
characteristic of most snakes before the Rattlesnake evolved from the
common ancestral stock of Pit Vipers. Whatever the cause of this
phenomenon—and we may well accept Herbert Spencer’s suggestion,
as applied by Shaler (op. cit., p. 36), that the wagging of the dog’s tail
and similar movements of that appendage is an escape of nervous force
restrained from other modes of expression at the moment:

we may take

*Ophid. N. Amer., 1883, p. xxvi; Bull. Mus. Com. Zool., x11, 1888, p. 264.

392 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

it for granted that the forms from which the Rattlesnake evolved were
in the habit of vibrating the tip of the tail at a high rate of speed.
This condition clearly understood, there is no difficulty in tracing the
origin of the rattle.

In this connection I may again call attention to Garman’s often
quoted article,* and to reproduce his figure of the tail and of a speci-
men of the Copperhead, Agkistrodon contortriaz (fig. 32). It does not
need long explanation to show how easily a tail cap like the one repre-
sented might be modified into the button, the ring-like swellings of
which would prevent the slough from being pushed off. The develop-
ment once started, the increasing irritation would lead to heightened
nutrition and excessive accumulation of tissue. In tracing mentally
this evolution it must not be forgotten, as Garman on a later occasion
(Science, xx, 1892, p. 17) remarks, that the present
development of the rattle “embraces much that is a
consequence of its possession, much that has been

Fig 32. induced by its presence and use.”
as eee oer Garman expressly protests against the assumption

Side view. Nearly thattherattlesnakes have been derived directly from the

he eer copperhead, and thinks it more probable that the two

rattlesnake genera have had a double origin, Sistrurus
having been derived from a stock more nearly related to Agkistrodon;
the Crotalh proper, with small head scales, from forms nearer to Lachesis.

I can not agree to this proposition, which lays more stress on the
number and size of the head shields than upon the rattle and the other
characteristics of these snakes. The rattle is a highly specialized
instrument, essentially alike both in Crotalus and in Sistrurus, while
the nine large head shields, in the possession of which the latter genus
agree with Agkistrodon, is the common, generalized arrangement which
they share with nearly all the nonvenomous snakes, and which was
undoubtedly a characteristic of the ancestor from which they all—
including Lachesis and Crotalus—have been derived. There are, indeed,
numerous examples among various species of Crotalus of individuals
showing a tendency to a reversion to this ancestral arrangement.

The popular belief in the power of the poisonous snake to “charm” its
victims into a state of helplessness is by no means exterminated. In
spite of all that has been argued and explained against it there are
people still who profess to have ocular proof of this power. Time and
again it has been related by trustworthy observers how birds or small
mammals have been seen to approach the coiled snake, drawn toward
it as by a magic spell they were unable to withstand; how, under the
infuence of an excitement which made them forgetful to everything
around them, apparently dreading the terrible fate awaiting them yet
unable to avoid it, they finally ventured too near, only to be hit by the
lightning stroke of the hitherto almost motionless snake, whose only

* Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., x11, pl. ii, fig. 14; Science, xx, 1892, p. 17, fig. 5.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA, 393

sign of life consisted in the following of the victim’s mad efforts
with the staring eyes and the incessant darting out and in of the
rapid tongue. Many of these blood-curdling tales are unfortunately
embellished with such absurd details, evidently the children of an
inflamed imagination, as to throw discredit on the whole story. It is
not uncommon to hear it stated that the eyes of the snake were emit-
ting fire, and that the unfortunate victim finally darted directly into
the widely expanded mouth of the expectant reptile.

In spite of these extravaganzas, however, there is evidently enough
truth in the numberless observations of this nature to keep the scien-
tists (whose duty it is to doubt and dissect all these things) busy try-
ing to evolve a theory by which to explain so much of the stories as
appeared worthy of being admitted as facts. Old as the stories are, the
explanations and theories of the doubters are not of yesterday either.
One hundred and forty years ago Peter Kalm, a Swedish natnranst,
and pupil of Linneus, wrote a detailed and, considering the tiie, aceur-
ate and interesting account* of the Rattlesnake, based upou his experi-
ence during his travels in Eastern North America, in which he gives
an elaborate description of how the fascination is said to take place.
He then continues as follows:

This is the story as commonly told by the inhabitants of North America, both by
the common people and by the better classes, by the ignorant as well as by the
learned. I myself have never seen it, and have even now great difficulty in believ-
ing it. Among the many hundreds who have told me of it not more than ten or
twelve asserted that they had seen it with their own eyes. However, among these
there were some men so trustworthy, and their accounts agreed in most particulars
so well, that I almost gave up all doubt as to the truth.

Ihave attempted to explain this alleged charm in this way: I have seenin America
how numerous birds in the woods, were running on the ground in search of food and
so tame that a man could approach very close; they might in the same manner get
too near to the snake, which is lying quiet and thus might easily have a chance to
strike them; the bird is unable to get away farther than the nearest tree, where it
is obliged to rest and finally falls down, the snake now seizing its prey. This expla-
nation was particularly suggested to me by the story told me by a woman in America,
who had once seen a rabbit running across the road, then suddenly stop and fall
down as if crazy. She then saw a Rattlesnake which had followed the rabbit, but
she did not take time to observe what followed. We often see that when a cat is
out hunting, the little birds collect about him from some distance, uttering a certain
ery. Ifthe bird has its nest in the neighborhood, the greater noise it will make and
the nearer it will approach. The cat walks quietly along, as if it does not concern
him at all; the bird becomes the more daring; it approaches nearer and nearer till
it comes within reach of the cat, or even darts down upon his back; that is the
opportunity of the cat to grab it. Some small birds in America, not at all afraid or
having their nest near the roadside, often act in the same manner at the approach of
man, often flying almost direct in the faces of the passers-by. As the sparrows pursue
the hawk, thus small birds make outcries at their enemies and become more daring
the quieter the latter are; the same, possibly, takes place with the fascination of the
rattlesnake. Or may it be that they approach too close out of curiosity, since his
eyes glitter and burn like fire when angry or when said to be fascinating? Or is it

*Sv. Vetensk. Acad. Handl., x11, 1752, pp. 308-319; xrv, pp. 52-67; pp, 185-194.

O94 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

possible that the charm is due to some fetid and poisonous odor which he emits and
by which the animals are overcome and made unconscious? Or may not every one
of these suggestions contribute toward the result?

The speculations of a century and a half have added scarcely any new
suggestion of apparent plausibility to those of Dr. Kalm, except, per-
haps, the idea that the whirring noise of the rattle might producetsuch
a terror in the intended victims as to completely paralyze their will
power.

On the other hand, there has accumulated a mass of negative evi-
dence in the shape of observations on snakes in captivity, which have
led some authorities to deny entirely the actuality of the phenomenon.
Dr. S. Weir Mitchell, who has had unexcelled opportunities of obser-
vation, has this to say* upon the subject:

I have very often put animals, such as birds, pigeons, guinea pigs, mice, and dogs,
into the cage with a Rattlesnake. They commonly exhibited no terror after their
recovery from alarm at being handled and dropped into a box. ‘The smaller birds
were usually some time in becoming composed, and fluttered about in the large cage
until they were fatigued, when they soon became amusingly familiar with the snakes,
and were seldom molested, even when caged with six or eight large Crotali. The
mice, which were similarly situated, lived on terms of easy intimacy with the snakes,
sitting on their heads, moving round on their gliding coils, undisturbed and uncon-
scious of danger. Larger animals were not so sate, especially if they moved
abruptly and rapidly about the snakes. The birds, mice, and larger animals often
manifested an evident curiosity, which prompted them to approach the snake cau-
tiously. Sometimes this was rewarded by a blow, as was sure to be the case when
a dog indulged his inquisitiveness by smelling the snake with his muzzle. Some-
times the snake retreated, and struck only when driven to bay, Usually, the smaller
animals indulged their inquisitive instinct unhurt, and were allowed to live for
days in the same cage with the dreaded reptile.t

These are the sole facts which I have seen bearing any relation to the supposed
fascinating faculty. They appear to me to lend no strength to the idea of its exist-
ence.

Similar evidence is given by numerous other observers, some
expressly adding that even the most threatening rattling did not seem
to have any terrorizing effect upon the captive animals.

It should not be forgotten, however, that Rattlesnakes in captivity,
as a rule, are very timid, dull, and with but very little desire to eat.
Their victims, moreover, if wanted, are within easy reach, consequently
there would be no necessity for exerting any faculty of fascination,
even if the snake possessed it.

Dr. Alfred Brehm’s experience, on the other hand, is more positive
and seems directly to corroborate Kalin’s first suggestion. According to
‘Prof. F. L.Oswald’s version, Brehm procured a couple of able-bodied Rat.
tlesnakes and turned them loose in a well-lighted garret, where he could
observe all their movements without betraying his presence. At first

*Researches on the Venom of the Rattlesnake, 1861, p. 5.

t It is proper to add that the curiosity thus exhibited by animals, and especially
by mice and dogs, was as active when the snake was not regarding the intruder as
at other times.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 395

his prisoners stayed in their lair in the recess of an open box, but on the
morning of the third day they began to show symptoms of appetite,
and the professor treated them to a breakfast of live blackbirds. About
five minutes after the appearance of the newcomers, one of the snakes
left her headquarters and crawled across to the corner next to the
front window, while her mate took post behind a waterpot near the
center of the room. The birds were too busy to notice them at all.
The temptation to attempt escape in a lightward direction seemed to
occupy them too much to mind such inferior incidents as the maneuvers
of a crawling object on the floor. The front window with its large
panes seemed to prove specially attractive, and the ambushed snake
had just contracted her coils for the third time when the descent of a
fluttering bird gave her a chance to bring matters to a crisis.

“No need of charming in this case,” thought the professor when the
stricken blackbird recoiled with a frightened squawk. But there was
still need of patience. For nearly a minute the doomed bird fluttered
about in an aimless way before the chemicals began to operate in earnest
and he fell over on his side with half-opened wings. He was too far
gone even to keep on his legs, and only then the snake crawled up to
take possession of her prey, though she had all along watched her
victim with glittering eyes.

Brehm repeated his experiment with sparrows, gophers, common rats,
weasels, quails, woodpeckers, and meadow larks, and always with an
analogous result, except in the case of a woodpecker that made its way
to the top of the window and died out of reach of the serpent. In every
other case the victim at first made its escape, but was captured in
articulo mortis, after betraying its waning strength by all sorts of curi-
ous symptoms. Even the weasel gave up its attempt at retaliation
after a short struggle, and in its last moments staggered out of its
hiding-place and finaliy directly toward the approaching enemy.

I think I have seen it suggested somewhere, though I am now unable
to find the reference, that the alleged faculty of fascination might be of
a hypnotic nature. This suggestion may not be so entirely absurd as
at first appears, if we remember the highly nervous and excitable
nature of the birds and the ease with which some of them, at least, are
brought under influences similar to those of hypnotism. In this con-
nection I may call attention to a very curious device used in some parts
of Germany for decoying larks, the so-called “iark mirror” (Lerchen-
spiegel). As described and figured by Naumann* it consists of an oval
piece of wood studded with small pieces of broken looking-glass, some
not larger than a pea, which is made to revolve upon a low stick put
into the ground. The glittering of the revolving glass pieces reflecting
the sun seems to attract the larks, which dart down upon it and are
then caught in the nets. The flickering light seems to ‘ fascinate” the
bird.

*Naturgeschichte der Vogel Deutschlands, 1v, pp. 186-187 (1824).

396 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

After all, is not the objection which some authors make to the power
of “charming” or “fascinating” more directed against the use of these
words themselves than against the phenomenon which they are intended
to describe?

The possibility, already expressed by Kalm, that the victimsmight be
overcome by a special fetid smell, said to be emitted by the snake, does
not seem to have any foundation in fact, much less the more fanciful
suggestion by more “popular” writers that the cause is a poisonous
quality of the snake’s breath. It is true that there are situated some
glands about the vent which eject a fluid of a penetrating odor, if the
snakes are handled roughly, but it is a common observation that the
erotalids under ordinary circumstances issue no peculiar odor. Dr.
Mitchell states that the fluid referred to is of a yellow or dark brown
color; that it may be ejected to a distance of 2 or 3 feet, and thatit is
irritant when it enters the eye, although not otherwise injurious. Iam
not aware that these glands and their secretion in the pit vipers have
been studied in detail.

Occasionaily we hear of the finding of large numbers of Rattlesnakes
or copperheads in caves inrocks brought to light by blasting for a rail-
road or a quarry. We are also all familiar with the periodically
recurring story, now at least 200 years old, however, of the man who
built his log cabin against the side of the mountain in such a manner
that the perpendicular face of the rock formed the back wall of the
hut, and who with his family had to spend the first night among the
rafters because the heat from the fire had thawed out the inhabitants
of a vast rattlesnake ‘den” somewhere in the rock, the noisy serpents
coming out by the hundreds and taking possession of the floor and
the beds. We have also heard the more modern and improved edition -
of this story, apparently due to the vivid imagination of western
journalists, a-cording to which the Kansas farmer erected the same log
cabin in the same position—not for himself, however, but for his son, who
intended to spend Ins honeymoon in it, and who, with his young bride,
was found the mormng after the wedding, killed and partly eaten by an
army of the loathsome reptiles. It would fill an entire volume were I to
mention all the gruesome snake stories that are served up by an enter-
prising press with an ever increasing amount of high seasoning to
satisfy the cravings of a public now habitually fed on sensations.
Stripped of all the lurid word painting, of ail the epithets suggesting
sliminess and other qualities not belonging to any snakes, and of all
exaggerations as to numbers, stench, and noise, there lies at the bottom
the truth that these poisonous snakes, like many others of the harmless
kind, in winter often congregate in great numbers in‘some cavity in the
ground or among rocks. In these retreats they spend the cold season
in a state of more or less deep stupor, or lethargy, until warm weather
comes to quicken their pulses, when they issue from their winter

= POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 397

quarters, spreading out over the neighboring region and passing the
summer solitary or in pairs. In very hot and dry climates this hiberna-
tion has an equivalent in the wstivation, by which term Dr. Cooper
has designated a similarly lethargic state during the hottest and driest
portion of the summer.

Considering the small number of these snakes met with in the fields
or in the woods during the warm seasons, the large numbers some-
times found in these Rattlesnake dens in winter is simply astounding.
It seems as if all the pit vipers of the surrounding country had come
together in one spot, and there are good reasons to suppose that so is
actually the fact. The question naturally arises: How have all these
snakes obtained their information about this apparent place of rendez-
vous and how have they been able to find their way to it? It is a
phenomenon in its nature not unlike that of the migration of birds,
and 1s apparently even more difficult of a satisfactory explanation.
The old pre-darwinian conception of the inherent and infallible instinct
explains neither, but how is the more scientific idea of the inherited,
unconscious knowledge accumulated and crystallized, as it were, dur-
ing countless generations, how is it to apply in the present case?

As a matter of fact we know yet too little of the habits of the snakes
and of their whole life history to give any explanation much better
than a conjecture. I shall, therefore, not attempt any solution of the
question here, but for the benefit of those who might want to take it
up I shall quote an ingenious theory propounded recently by Mr. W. H.
Hudson,* whose charming pictures of animal life in the Argentine
Republic has made his name a household word among naturalists.
After having briefly alluded to the habit of the rattlesnake to hiber-
nate socially in dens, he proceeds as follows:

Clearly in this case the knowledge of the hibernating den is not merely tradi-
tional—that is, handed down from generation to generation, through the young each
year following the adults, and so forming the habit of repairing at certain seasons
to a certain place—for the young serpent soon abandons its parent to lead an inde-
pendent life; and on the approach of cold weather the hibernating den may be a
long distance away, 10 or 20, or even 30 miles from the spot in which it was born.
The annual return to the hibernating den is then a fixed unalterable instinct, like
the autumnal migration of some birds to a warmer latitude. It is doubtless favor-
able to the serpents to hibernate in large numbers massed together, and the habit
of resorting annually to the same spot once formed, we can imagine that the indi-
viduals—perhaps a single couple in the first place—trequenting some very deep, dry,
and well-sheltered cavern, safe from enemies, would have a great advantage over
others of their race; that they would be stronger and increase more, and spread
during the summer months farther and farther from the cavern on all sides, and
that the farther afield they went the more would the instinct be perfected, since all
the young serpents that did not have the instinct of returning unerringly to the
ancestral refuge, and that, like the outsiders of their race, to put it that way, merely
crept into the first hole they found on the approach of the cold season, would be
more liable to destruction.

*The Naturalist in La Plata (London, 1892), pp. 321-322,

ee a ee a a me = —_ ae ar,”

098 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Of all our native snakes, the habits of none are better known than
those of our pit vipers, yet there are many points in dispute which it will
require time and patience and good luck to settle. Other questions
which we have considered to be answered must be discussed over again,
because later observations seem to cast doubt upon the conclusions
long since arrived at. Thus, we have believed it an undoubted fact
that all the Pit Vipers bring forth their young alive. Gradually the
conclusion had been gained that all of them in this respect are essen-
tially alike, and that the progeny is comparatively limited in number.
The constantly repeated stories of Copperheads having had innumerable
young ones have been shown to rest on confusion with the young of the
spreading adder. The average number ot young Pit Vipers born by
species occurring in our country seems to be 8 or 9. exceptionally as high
as 14, while as many as 24 have been authentically recorded for some
exotic forms. But now we read in the very latest edition of Brehm’s
“Thierleben” (Vol. v1, 1892, p. 444) that credence is given to the account
of Geyer that he has observed a nest of about 40 Rattlesnake eggs in
the very act of hatching! Now it is quite true that there are reptiles
in which the time of the hatching and that of the expulsion of the eggs
are so close that sometimes the young ones are hatched within the body
of the mother, and thus born alive, but with these snakes the case is
somewhat different, for the egg covering is so thin that it is most
improbable that the eggs are ever expelled before the young have
broken through.

In close connection with the aboye we are confronted by a not unfa-
miliar question: ‘¢ Do the snakes swallow their young for the sake of pro-
tection?” Concerning, as it does, the snakes in general and not the
pit vipers in special, except in so far as they are reported to be among
the ones observed to do this very thing, I should have left this theme
at the present occasion with a reference to Dr. G. Brown Goode’s admi-
rable summary of all the evidence up to 1873, * as it would carry us too
far to present all that has been written about the subject since then in
this connection, but from the many unpublished letters in my possession
bearing upon the question, and which I have reserved for a later sep-
arate publication, I wish to print the following extracts from one
by the late Dr. William C. Avery, ot Greensboro, Ala., because they
pointedly expose the inconsistency of some of those who deny the actu-
ality of an occurreiice testified to by numerous and competent witnesses,
simply because it seems improbable and because they have not seen it
themselves. Apropos of an account in a previous letter of how he
himselfonce saw a young water moccasin run down its mother’s throat,
Dr. Avery wrote as follows:

My reason for mentioning in my last letter the fact that I had seen a snake take
her young into her throat was that it had been denied by some writers. In a work

*On the question ‘‘Do Snakes Swallow their Young?” Proce. Amer. Assoc,
Advance. Science, Portland Meeting, 1873 (pp. 176-185).

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 399

by Charles C. Abbott, M. D., entitled ‘‘Model Book of Natural History,” the writer
says, on page 499: ‘“‘The threadbare subject of snakes swallowing their young. has
been discussed again and again. The sum and substance of the matter is—they
don’t.” * * * The fact of the matter is—they do; and men believe they do, because
they have seen the young in the act, Dr. Abbott denies this truth, and yet on page
72 of his ‘‘Model Book,”-he writes: ‘‘Honey badgers are said to sit on their
haunches and shade their eyes with one paw while on the lookout fora bee tree.
This may seem a fishy story, but there is no reason for not accepting it. The world
is more full of marvels than mankind have imagined.”

Surely, the alleged performance of the snakes is not any more mar-
velous than that of the honey badger!

It was noted under the Harlequins, or Bead Snakes, that those poison-
ous snakes are closely imitated by certain kinds of harmless ones, so
close, in fact, that it is sometimes necessary to discriminate very nicely
in order to distinguish them. Some of the crotalids are subjects
of a similar mimicry which has given rise to a similar confusion of
names. Thus the ordinary and very harmless hog-nose snake, or
spreading adder, is in many districts known as the copperhead, on
account of its superficial resemblance to the latter and the dread
inspired by its certainly formidable looking antics is still heightened

UNDER SIDE OF TAIL OF WATER MOCCASIN.

by the terror which tradition attaches to the name. The case of the
water moccasin is similar. The name Moccasin has nearly lost its sig-
nificance and needs a qualifying adjective in order to convey with cer-
tainty the meaning of the employer whether he intends the poisonous
or the harmless kind. Dr. G. Brown Goode has called attention * to the
close imitation of Agkistrodon piscivorus (the Moccasin) by the Banded
Water-snake, Natrix fasciatus, and asks justly, “Is not this a fair case
of protective mimicry ?”

There should never be any difficulty in distinguishing these imitators
from the poisonous species they mimic, with the specimens in hand, for
the absence or the presence of the “ pit” would at-once settle the
question. Very often the slayer of the serpent deems it a religious duty
to immediately put his heel to its head and crush it out of all recogni-
tion. In such cases the tail may serve as a distinguishing character,
for in the hog-nose snake, Heterodon, and in the water snake, Natrix,
the large scales covering its under side are divided on the middle line,
while in the venomous Copperhead and Water Moccasin the greater
majority of these subeaudals are undivided. The accompanying fig-
ures (figs. 33, 34) show this distinction, and the heads of the harmless

*Mimicry in Snakes. Amer. Naturalist, vir, Dec. 1873, pp. 747-748.

400 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

imitators (figs. 37, 38, 39, 40) may also serve to aid in the identification
when compared with figures 35 and 36 and with those of the various
venomous species given farther on under the heads of the latter.

Big. 34.
F WATER SNAKE, NATRIX.

With living snakes the matter is more difficult. To the person
familiar with the various kinds of snakes, their appearance and their
habits, there may be no special difficulty in quickly recognizing them, if
he gets a good view of them, but it would be useless to attempt by

UNDER SIDE OF TAIL

(S

Fig. 36
HEAD OF COPPERHEAD, SHOWN FROM TOP AND SIDE.
( fter Bird )

Paes Ge
Zl ee
LES
/ oe ) SUS “<
ie SSeS
a I 32995
GQ! Ne eS
Sa
SSS
SEAS < a ie
Vig. 37. Fig. 38.

HEAD OF SPREADING ADDER (HETERODON), SHOWN FROM TOP AND SIDE.

Fig.30. Fig. 40.

HEAD OF WATER SNAKE (NATRIX), SHOWN FROM TOP AND SIDE.
description, or even by figure, to make the differences of the living
snakes so plain to those who have not learned to discriminate between
them, with the specimens in hand, that it would be of any value to him,

ie Mg a ine Ee

PLATE 3.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger.

‘UMESN] [BUOTIVN “SQ 9Y) ul ySsvo v WIOA
*XIYLYOLNOO NOGOULSIMDY—‘GVSHYsddOO

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 401

Synopsis of the Crotalid genera inhabiting North America north of Mexico.

a' Tail without rattle, ending in a point.-.....- isias ese SS | Sacinoe AGKISTRODON.
a? Tail provided with a rattle.
b' Top of head covered by regular shields ..--.....-...........----- SISTRURUS.
b? Top of head covered by numerous scales..........--..---+--....-.- CROTALUS.

Genus AGKISTRODON,* Beauvois.
THE MOCCASINS.

1799.—Agkistrodon, BEAUVOIS, Trans. Am. Philos. Soc., Iv, p. 381 (Type 4.
mokasen Beauv.).

1802.—Scytale, LATREILLE, Hist. Nat. Rept., 111, p. 158 (same type).

1803.—-Cenchris, DAUDIN, Hist. Nat. Rept., v (p. 358) (same type; not of Beauv.,
1799).

1819.—Scytalus, RAFINUSQUE, Sillim. Journ., I, p. 84 (emend.).

1826.—Tisiphone, FITZINGER, N. Class. Rept., pp. 34, 63 (type 7. cuprea Fitz. ).

1836.—Acontias, Troost, Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. N. Y., 111, p. 176 (type A. leucostoma).

1836.— Toxicophis, Troost, Ann. Lye. Nat. Hist. N. Y., 111, p. 190 (same type).

1854.—Ancistrodon, BAIRD, Serp. N. Y., p. 13 (emend.).

Synopsis of the species of Agkistrodon occurring in the United States.

a', A loreal; orbit separated from supralabials by scales; usually 23 scale-rows.
A. contortrix.
a. No loreal; supralabials entering orbit; 25 scale-rows ..---...------ A. piscivorus.

THE COPPERHEAD.

Agkistrodon contortrix,t (Linnieus.).
Plate 3.

1766.—Boa contortrix LINNEUS, Syst. Nat., 12 ed., 1, p. 873.—Scytale contortrix,
LATREILLE, Hist. Nat. Rept., 11, p. 159 (1802).—Cenchris contortrix,
Gray, Ann. Philos., 1825, p.—. — Gray, Cat. Snakes Br. Mus., p. 16
(1849).—Gray, Zool. Miscell., p. 50 (1842).—Trigonocephalus contortriz,
Hotsrook, N. Am. Herpet, 1 ed., 0, p. 69 (1838).—HOLBROOK, N. Am.
Herpet, 2 ed., mi, p. 39 (1842).—KIRTLAND, in Mather’s Sec. Rep.
Geol. Surv., Ohio, 1838, p. 167.—Dr Kay, Zool. N. Y., 111, p. 53 (1842).—
Lr Conte, South. Med. Surg. Journ., 1x, 1853, pp. 651, 665.—DUMERIL et
BIBRON, Erpét. Génér., VU, ii, p. 1494 (1854 ).—-HALLOWELL, in Sitgreave’s
Exp. Zuni Colo. Riv., p. 147 (1854).—HALLOWELL, Proc. Phila. Acad.,
1856 (p. 249).—JAN, Rev., Mag. Zool., 1859, Extr. p. 29.—Jan, Elenc.
Sist. Ofid., p. 125 (1863).—<Agkistrodon contortriz, BATRD and GrRaARD, N.
Am. Serp., p. 17 (1853).—Jorpan, Man. Vertebr. North. U. S.,5 ed., p.
199 (1888).—Hay, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., xv, 1892, p. 386.—Hay, Batr.
Rept. Indiana, p. 123 (1893).—Hurrer, Trans. St. Louis Acad. Se. v1,
p. 258 (1893).—H. GarMAN, Bull. Essex Inst., xxvi, 1894, p. 36.—Ancis-
trodon contortriz, BatrD, Serp. N. Y., p. 13 (1854).—Barrp, Mex. Bound.
Surv., u, Rept., p. 15 (1859).—Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 336.—
Corr, Bull. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, p. 34 (1875).—Copr, Bull. U. S. Nat.
Mus., No. 17, p. 24 (1880).—Copr, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., xIv, 1891, p.
683 (1892).—ALLEN, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., x11, 1868, pp. 11, 35.—
CovuEs, Proc. Phila, Acad., 1871, p. 48.—CraGIN, Trans. Kansas Acad.

*From the Greek ayxcotpov (agkistron), a hook; ddév (odon), a tooth.
t From the Latin contortriz, one who twists.

H. Mis, 184, pt. 2 26

402 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Sec., vu, p. 121 (1881).—Smirn, Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio, Iv, 1882, p. 675.—
TruE, in Hammond’s South Carolina, p. 235 (1883).—KUNzE, Amer,
Natural., Xv, 1883, p. 1229.—YaRRow, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, pp.
12, 80 (1883).—_GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.,1, Ophid., pp. 120, 178 (1883).—
Davis and Rice, Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist., 1, No. 5 (p.28) (1883).—
Davis and Rice, Bull. Chic. Acad. Se., 1, p. 28 (1883).—Hay, Amph.
Rept. Indiana, p. 13 (1885).—H. GarMAN, Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat.
Hist., 11, p. 314 (1892).

1799.—A gkistrodon mokasen, BEAUVOIS, Trans. Am. Philos, Soc., IV, p. 370, footnote. .

1803.—Cenchris mokeson, DAUDIN, Hist. Nat. Rept., v, p. 358.
1819.—Scytalus cupreus, RAFINESQUE, Sillim. Journ., I, p. 84.—HARLAN, Med.
Phys. Res. (p. 130) (1835).
1819.—Scytale mockeson, Say, Sillim. Journ., 1, p. 257.—Cenchris mockeson HARLAN,
Journ. Phila. Acad., v, 1827 (p. 366).—HarLAN, Med. Phys. Res.(p.128)
(1835).
1827.—Cenchris marmorata, Bon, Isis, 1827, p. 562.
1836.—Acontias atrofuscus, Troost, Ann. N. Y. Lyc. Nat. Hist., 1, p. 180.—Towt-
cophis atrofuscus, BAIRD and GIRARD, N. Am. Serp., p. 150 (1853).—Tri-
gonocephalus atrofuscus, HOLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., m1, p. 43 (1842).—
Dr Kay, Zool. N.Y., m1, p. 55 (1842).—Cenchris atrofuscus, GRAY, Cat.
Snakes Brit. Mus., p. 16 (1849).—Anecistrodon atrofuscus, COPE, Bull. U.
S. Nat Mus., No.1, p.34 (1875).
1837. — Trigonocephalus cenchris, SCHLEGEL, Essay Physiogn. Serp., 1, p. 191; 1, p.
553.—Max v. WIED, Verz. Rept. Reise N. Amer., p. 77 (1865).
1853.— Trigonocephalus histrionicus, DUMERIL, Mém. Acad. Se. Paris, XXVIII (p.
534); Prodr. Class. Serp., p. 138.
1883.—Ancistrodon contoririx, var. atrofuscus, GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1,
Ophid., p. 178.
igures.—DAUDIN, Hist. Nat. Rept., v (pl. LxXx, figs. 3, 4), (1803).— HOLBROOK, N.
Am. Herpet., 1 ed., u, pl. x1v (1838); 2 ed., 1, pl. vir; pl. rx (atrofuscus)
(1842).—Dr Kay, Zool. N. Y., 111, pl. 1x, fig. 18 (1842).—Ba trp, Serp.N. Y., pl.
I, fig. 3 (1854).—Barrp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Rept., pl. xxv, fig. 12 (1859).—
JAN, Icon. Ophid., livr. 46, pl. v, fig 1 (1874).—BocourtT, Miss. Scient. Me-
xique, Zool. 111, Rept., pl. xxvirr (1882).—GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., I,
Ophid., pl. vin, fig. 1 (1883).—Brehm’s Thierleben, 3 ed., vu, p. 468 (1892).

It does not appear that any competent herpetologist has ever exam-
ined a specimen of the so-called ‘‘ Highland Moccasin,” described by
Troost as Acontias atrofuscus, and said to oceur in the mountain regions
from Virginia southward, and its status is therefore so doubtful that I
have not ventured to treat it as a separate form. Even Holbrook, who
gave a figure and a lengthy description, did not see a specimen, and
furnished it only on Troost’s authority. On the whole, this variety
appears to be only a partial melanism, as we frequently find it among
snakes in similar localities.

Description.*—Loral present. Labials not entering into the orbit.
Dorsal rows of seales, 23. Color, light chestnut, with inverted y-
shaped darker blotches on the sides. Labials yellowish white (figs.
41 and 42).

More slender than Toxicophis {Agkistrodon| piscivorus. Plates on
neck and side smaller. Two anterior orbitals, one above the other, the
iower narrower and forming the posterior wall of pit. A distinct loral

* By S. F. Baird, in Baird and Girard’s N. Am. Serp., p. 17.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. A403

between these and the posterior nasal. Labial not forming part of the
orbit, but separated by the four post and suborbitals. Labials not so
largely developed; 8 above, third and fourth largest; 9 below.

Above light hazel brown, rather brighter on the top of the head, and
everywhere minutely mottled with very fine, dark points. On each side
is a series of 15 to 26 darker chestnut-colored blotches resting on the
abdominal scutellie | ventrals, or gastroteges], and suddenly contracting
about the middle of the side, so as somewhat to resemble an inverted y.
These blotches extend to the vertebral line, where they may be trun-
eated or end in a rounded apex. Generally, those of opposite sides
alternate with each other, but frequently they are confluent above, form-
jng continuous bands. They are so disposed that the intervals between
the successive blotches are pretty much of the same shape and size,
thoughinverted. he centers of the blotches are lighter; in some cases

Vig. 41 . Fig. 42.

HEAD OF COPPERHEAD, SHOWN FROM TOP AND SIDE.
( After Baird. )

so much so as greatly to increase the y-shaped resemblance. Color
beneath dull yellowish, with a series of distinct large, dark blotches, 35
to 45 in number, on each side. Chin and throat unspotted. Sides of
head cream color the line of demarcation very distinct; this passes
along the upper edge of head, in front of the eye, and involving the
lower three-fourths of the orbit, intersects the middle of the second
postorbital plate (counting from above), and extends along the first
row above the labials to the posterior edge of the last labial. The line
then comes back through the middle of the lower labial range, where it
is marked by a narrow black line. Rostral of the same color. A small
areolated dark spot near the inner edge of each occipital [parietal] plate.

Number of gastrosteges, 150 to 154; urosteges, undivided, 31 to 48;
divided, 0 to 18 pairs.

Fresh colors of Agkistrodon contortrix (young)—No. 19261; District of
Columbia, Government Insane Asylum grounds; Dr. J. W. Blackburn,
collector, September 16, 1892 (died in captivity October 31, 1892),
Ground color above duil vinaceous-cinnamon (Rob. Ridgway, Nomen-
elator of Colors, pl. Iv, fig. 15), head darker, drab (111, 18), marked with
tawny on the temples; dark markings, dark Prout’s brown (111, 10),
gradually fading into drab on the sides; tip of tail for the extent of
about 20 min., both above and below, bright olive-yellow (v1, 16), the
general ground color gradually fading into it at about 25 mm. from
the tip; ground color below ecru-drab (111, 21), dark markings seal-
brown (ti, 1); lips pale ecru-drab, the dark edge externally shaded
with tawny-olive. Iris silvery vinaceous-cinnamon,

A404 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Variation.—There is considerable individual variation in the size of
the parietal plates, and the number of supralabials varies between 7
and 8, as shown by Prof. Cope. The regular number of scale rows
across the middle of the body is 23, but occasionally a specimen may
be found with 25.

We have already referred to the probably melanistic variation of
specimens from Tennessee which have been described as A. atrofuscus.
The number of dark cross-bands is also very variable, as shown in the
description given above. Mr. Ragsdale has, in letters to me, alluded
to the fact that the specimens taken by him in Texas had the tip of
the tail greenish, while in eastern specimens it is stated to be blackish.
The material at hand, faded through long immersion in alcohol, throws
but little light upon the question, but in freshly killed specimens from
the neighborhood of Washington, I find that in the adult specimens
the tip of the tail above is of the same dark brownish color as the
dorsal blotches; in the young specimens, however, it is bright greenish
yellow, and it seems quite probable that in half-grown specimens it
may be of an intermediate olivaceous color.

Geographical distribution.—In a general way the range of the Copper-
head is coextensive with that of the Banded Rattlesnake, Crotalus
horridus, though as a rule it does not extend quite as far North. As
a compensation it goes considerably further South in the western por-
tion of its range, extending into the southern part of Texas.

In the Northeast it does not seem to reach further North than central
Massachusetts, though De Kay states that Holbrook had received spec-
imens from Vermont. Dr. J. A. Allen (Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist.,
X11, 1868, p. 11) speaks of its occurrence in Massachusetts as follows:

There is a well-known den of this species on Mount Tom, near which a considez-
able number of specimens are annually killed by different individuals. I have not
heard of it elsewhere in the State [Massachusetts], though Linsley has reported it
from Connecticut.

It is repeatedly asserted that the Copperhead does not occur in
Florida; but while it does not appear to be found in the peninsula
proper, it has been taken at its very base, as testified by specimens
from Gainesville sent to the National Museum by Judge J. Bell.

In Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nebraska it is lacking, and apparently
also in Iowa, as I find no reliable record of its capture in that State.

In Indiana, writes Dr. Hay, this venomous serpent, once abundant
in most localities of the southern half of the Staie, is now happily
becoming rare; in most localities it is probably entirely exterminated.
Where, however, the country is not thickly settled, and where there
are abundant forests and rocks, it may even yet be found in consider-
able numbers. In the northern portion of the State it has probably
always been scarce, but still present. The record for Illinois as given
by H. Garman is similar: “Throughout the State; rare north, frequent
south.”

West of the Mississippi it has been recorded from Missouri and

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA 405

Kansas, Indian, Territory, Louisiana, all the way down to the pine
woods north of Lake Pontchartrain, where Dr. G. Koln informs me
that.it is scarce, however. In Texas it seems well represented east of
the one hundredth meridian and north of the twenty-ninth parallel.

Habits.—It is agreed by almost all observers that the Copperhead, or
Upland Moceasir, Chunk-head, Deaf Adder, or Pilot Snake, as it is
called in various localities, is a much more vicious animal than the
Rattlesnake; not only because it strikes without giving the warning of
the rattle, though it is sometimes known to attempt this by quickly
vibrating the tail against some hard and dry objects, but also because it
isof amuch more aggressive nature. However, although considerably
quicker of motion than the Rattler, it is a comparatively slow snake,
and as Dr. Weir Mitchell has shown that its poison in proportion to the
quantity is less virulent than that of the Rattlesnake, its bite is less
dangerous, and as it but seldom exceeds 3 feet in length,* it is a much
less terrible animal than generally supposed.

Dr. H. C. Yarrow has reported quite an interesting series of cases of
poisoning from bites of copperheads (Am. Journ. Med. Se. (n. s.),
LXXXVII, 1884, pp. 422-435). Of the many cases recorded in the medi-
cal journals he had only found one fatal case, viz, that of a 6-year-old
boy, although some of thei were very severe, particularly the one which
came under his own observation, a case the more remarkable as the
snake was very small, ‘‘not over 14 inches long.” It is plain from the
symptoms, however, that the case owed but very little of its severity

-tothe venom injected by the snake, and it is an excellent example of

‘

how complicated such cases may be, and how difficult it is in cases both
of recovery and death to say how much is due to the activity of the
venom and how much to other circumstances.

Dr. R. E. Kunze (Am. Natural., xvil, 1883, pp. 1229-1238) thinks
that the Copperhead does not strike from a regular coil, like the Rattle-
snake, but that its effective blow is delivered when the middle of the
body is thrown into long, almost rectangular curves, and the head held
only slightly elevated above the ground.

S. Garman, as quoted by Dr. Hay, having studied the Copperhead in
captivity, states that they usually eat the prey as soon as it is dead and
even before it ceases to struggle. Sometimes lively mice would elude
two or three strokes, and this would seem to throw the snake into an
ecstacy of excitement. They would not eat fishes.

The Copperhead produces living young like the other crotatids, the
average number apparently varying between seven and nine. State-
ments often seen in newspapers referring to female copperheads with
an enormous number of young ones having been killed are due to acon-
fusion of this species with other snakes.

*A large male killed this year near Washington, D. C., and presented by Dr. J.
W. Blackburn to the Museum, measured, when fresh, 38 inches (about 965 mm.),
while a female killed near the same place last year was only about 1 inch shorter.

406 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

THE WATER MOCCASIN.
Agkistrodon piscivorus * (Lacépéde).
Plate 4.

1789.—Crotalus piscivorus, LACKPEDE, Hist. Nat. Serp., 11, Table Méth., p. 130.—
Scytale piscivora, LATREILLE, Hist. Nat. Rept., 111, p. 163 (1802).—Scytale
piscivorus, DAUDIN, Hist. Nat. Rept., v, p. 344 (1803).—Natrix piscirorus,
MrrreEM, Tentamen, p. 131 (1820).—Trigonocephalus piscivorus, HOLBROOK,
N. Am. Herpet., 1 ed., 11, p. 63 (1838).—HOLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., 2
ed., U1, p. 33 (1842).—De Kay, Zool. N. Y., m1, p. 55 (1842).—LE CONTE,
South. Med. Surg. Journ., 1x, 1853, pp. 651, 664.—DUMERIL et BIBRON,
Erpét. Génér., VU, ii, p. 1491 (1854).—JAaNn, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1859, extr.
p. 29.—JAN, Elenc. Sist. Ofid., p. 125 (1863).—Cenchris piscivorus, GRAY,
Zool. Mise., p. 51 (1841).—Gray, Cat. Snakes Brit. Mus., p. 16° (1849).—
EFFELD?T, Zool. Garten, xv, 1874 (p. 1).—Towxicophis piscivorus, BAIRD and
G1IRARD, N. Am. Serp., p. 19 (1853).—Bairp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Whipple’s
Route, Rept., p. 40 (1859).—SmiruH, Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio, Iv, p. 676
(1882).—Ancistrodon piscivorus, Core, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 336.—
Cork, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 1877, p. 64.—Copg, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No.
17, p. 24.—Copr, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., x1, 1888, p. 393.—Copr, Proc. U.
S. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891, p. 683 (1892).—CouEs and YARROW, Proe. Phila.
Acad,, 1878, p. 26.—TRUE, in Hammond’s South Carolina, p. 235 (1883).—
GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, pp. 121, 178 (1883).—GaRMAN, Bull. Essex
Inst., XXIv, p. 4 (1892).—Bor?tTGER, in Brehm’s Thierleben, 3 ed., vu, p.
469 (1892).—H. GARMAN, Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist., m1, p. 315
(1892).—Agkistrodon piscivorus, JORDAN, Man. Vert. North. U. S.,5 ed., p.
199 (1888).—H. GARMAN, Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist., 111, p. 187 (1890).—
H. GARMAN, Bull. Essex Inst., xxvi, p. 36 (1894).—Hay, Proe. U. S. Nat.

Mus., xv, 1892, p. 386.—Hay, Batr. Rept. Indiana, p. 184 (1893).—Lann- ©

BERG, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xvu, 1894, p. 336.
1802.—Coluber aquaticus, SHAW, Gen. Zool., 111, p. 425.
1829.—Trigonocephalus tisiphone, CUVIER, Regne Anim., 2 ed., 11 (p. 89) (in part).
1836.—Acontias leucostoma, Troost, Ann. N. Y. Lyceum Nat. Hist., 11, p. 176.
1853.— Toxicophis pugnax, BAIRD and GIRARD, N. Am. Serp., pp. 20, 156.—HaL-
LOWELL, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1856, p. 307.—-Barrp, Mex. Bound. Sury., 0,
Zool. Rept., p. 15 (1859).—Ancistrodon pugnax, COPE, Proc. Phila, Acad.,
1859, p. 336.
1854.— Trigonocephalus atrofuscus, HALLOWELL, in Sitgreave’s Exp. Zuni and
Colo. Riv., p. 147 (not of Troost). ;
1863.—Trigonocephalus piscivorus, var. pugnax JAN, Elenc. Sist. Ofid., p. 125.—
Ancistrodon piscivorus, subsp. pugnax, COPE, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 1,
p. 34.—GaRMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid., p. 159 (1883).—YarRRow,
Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 24, pp. 12, 80 (1883).
1875.—Ancistrodon piscivorus, subsp. piscivorus, Copr, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No.
1, p. 34.—YarRROw, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, pp. 12, 79 (1883).—
Davis and Rick, Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist., 1, No.5 (p. 28) (1883).
Davis and Ricks, Bull. Chie. Acad. Se., 1, p. 28 (1883).
Figures.—Troost, Ann. N. Y. Lye. Nat. Hist., 111, 1836, pl. v.—HOLBROOK, N.
Am. Herpet., 1 ed., m1, pl. x11 (1838), 2 ed., m1, pl. vin (1842).—Barrp, Pae.
R. R. Rep., x, Rept., pl. xxv, figs. 18, 14 (1859).—Bairpb, Mex. Bound. Surv.,
Zool. Rept., pl. vi (1859).—Jan, Icon. Ophid., livr. 46, pl. 1v (1874).—
Bocourt, Miss. Se. Mex., m1, Zool., Rept., livr. 8, pl. xxvi1 {1882).—GaR-
MAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.1, Ophid., pl. v1, fig. 2 (1883).—BREHM’s Thierleb.,
3 ed., vil, p. 470 (1892).

* From the Latin piscivorus, at fish-eating.

.

PLATE 4.

Stejneger.

Report of National Museum, 1893

4

woeD SNE BLO Rd

‘WIhesn] [VUOYRN “S " a4 Ul 4sBd B WLOAYT

“SNYOAIOSId NOGOYULSIMDYW¥—‘

LE Nee Mi

®

NISVOOOIA] YSLVM

we

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 407

Description.*—No loral. Inferior wall of orbit constituted by third
labiai: 25 dorsal.rows. Dark chestnut brown, with indistinct vertical
dark bars. Line from superciliary along the edge of the head, through
the middle of the second supralabial row. A second line from the
lowest point of the orbit parallel to the first (figs. 43 and 44).

Seales all large and well developed; those on the sides and back of
head conspicuously so. Two nasal plates, with the nostril between
them. Anterior orbitals 2, one above the other, the
- upper extending from the eye to the posterior nasal,
the lower linear and forming the upper wall of the
pit. Lower and posterior wall of pit constituted by
a narrow plate resting along the third labial and ter-
minating on the second. Third labial very large,
constituting the inférior wall of the orbit, of which 3
scales form the posterior. Upper labials 8, very large
and broad; lower10. Occipitals [parietals| terminated
each by a triangular plate. All the scales on the
back of the head carinated. Dorsal scales all cari-

: HEAD OF AGKISTRODON
nated. PISCIVORUS FROM

General color, dark chestnut-brown with darker = 4B°V®.
markings. Head above, purplish black. An obsolete Page
chestnut-brown streak passes from the posterior end of the superciliary
_along the upper edge of the head, through the middle of the second row
of supralabial scales. A narrow yellowish white line passes from the
third labial, or begins just below the lowest part of the orbit, and pass-
ing backward parallel with the first stripe crosses the angle of the mouth
at the seventh labial and meets the first stripe on the side of the neck,
where it is confluent with yellowish white of the throat. On the lower
labial are 3 short, nearly vertical, light bars; on fourth, sixth, and
seventh, the rest of the jaw itself, as well as the interval between the
stripes on the sides of the head, dark purplish brown, of which color is
also the space in front and below the eyes. General color above, dull
dark chestnut-brown. On each side a series
of 20 or 30 narrow, vertical, purplish black
bars 1 or 2 scales wide. Of these, sometimes
2 contiguous to each other on the sameéside are
united above into an arch, inclosing a space,
the center of which is rather duskier than the
ground color; at others, corresponding bars
from the opposite sides unite and form half rings, encircling the body.
Sometimes there is a lighter shade bordering the dark bars. Beneath,
black, blotched with yellowish white.

Number of ventrals [gastrosteges], 130 to 145; of subcaudals [uro-
steges|, 39 to 45, of which divided, 0 to 21.

Fig. 44.
SAME FROM SIDE.

*By 8S. F. Baird, in Baird and Girard’s N. Am. Serp., p. 19.

408 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Variation—The supposed species, or subspecies, A. pugnax, was
based upon an alleged different arrangement of the anterior supra-
labials in specimens from Texas, the second being crowded up from the
commissure by the first and third. Later investigations of much addi-
tional material have shown that the character is very variable and
entirely too unstable to serve as a foundation for a division.

The number of divided urosteges is also highly variable and seems to
have no significance.

In the young specimens the colors are much lighter and the pattern
better defined than in the adults.

Geographical distribution.—In the main, the Water Moccasin, or the
Cotton-Mouth, as it is also often called from the whiteness of its mouth,
has the same range in the United States as the harlequin snake, Hlaps
fulvius, extending as it does from Nortii Carolina along the coast to
the Mexican boundary, including the entire peninsula of Florida, It
is also found a considerable distance up the Mississippi River and some
of its southern tributaries.

In North Carolina it is found in several localities. We have speci-
mens from Wilmington and New Berne, and Messrs. Brimley, of
Raleigh, inform me that in the summer of 1891 one specimen over 3
feet long was taken on Neuse River, 1 mile above Milburne, some 6
or 8 miles east of Raleigh. According to Coues and Yarrow, it is very
numerous in woods of Bogue banks on the mainland near wet and
marshy places. Holbrook locates its northern limit at Pedee River.
In the coast regions of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Missis-
sippi it is very numerous, as well as over the whole of Florida as far
as Key West. The same may be said of Louisiana, and Dr. Gustave
Kohn informs me that the moccasin, or the Congo serpent, as it is
called by the Creoles, is common even within the limits of the city of
New Orleans. Along the Mississippi River it ascends into southern
Missouri, Illinois, and Western Kentucky. In Illinois it oveurs along
the Wabash River at Mount Carmel, and Mr. Robert Ridgway assures
me that trustworthy witnesses have told him of its former occurrence
as far as Vincennes, in Indiana. On the west side it ascends the
Arkansas River the entire breadth of the State of Arkansas, and
seems to reach as far up as the boundary of Oklahoma Territory at
least. In eastern Texas it follows the rivers into the interior even as
far up as Dallas, where Cope regards it as still abundant, but in the
western, more arid portion of the State it does not seem to go farther
up than about the thirtieth parallel, though on the coast it is quite
plentiful.

Habits.—Unlike the other Pit Vipers inhabiting the United States,
the Water Moccasin, as the name implies, is distinctively a water snake.
Holbrook, who had plenty of opportunity to observe its habits, writes
that it is found about damp swampy places, or in water—far from
which it is never observed. In summer, numbers of these serpents are

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 409

seen resting on the low branches of such trees as overhang the water,
into which they plunge on the slightest alarm. Catesby, he continues,
thinks they select these places to watch for their prey. They merely
choose them in order to bask in the sun; for in those situations deprived
of trees, as the ditches of rice fields, their basking places are often on
dry banks. They are the terror of the negroes that labor about rice
plantations, where they are more dreaded than the Rattlesnake, which
only bites when irritated, or in self-defense, or to secure its prey; the
water moccasin, on the contrary, attacks everything that comes within
his reach, erecting his head and opening his mouth for some seconds
before he bites.

Notwithstanding the fact that the poison of the Water Moccasin has
been found proportionately less virulent than that of the Rattlesnake
and the Copperhead, the fear it inspires is well founded, for itis a much
larger and especially much heavier snake than the Copperhead. I do
not know the extreme length to which it may grow, but it probably
exceeds 4 feet considerably, as the largest specimen in the National
Museum collection measures 453 inches (1.160 m.) with a circumference
around the thickest part of the body of not less than 74 inches (190
mm.). Records of cases of Moccasin bites are rather scarce, however,
and the fatalities are probably not numerous. A serious case was
recently reported to the writer by Mr. E. P. Alexander, of Georgetown,
S. C., of a woman bitten in one finger. On September 26, 1893, he
wrote again:

The woman recovered, but suffered much for two weeks, flesh sloughing from
finger, so that amputation of the finger, or even of the hand, was seriously consid-
ered by the attending physician,

The habits of the Water Moccasin have been studied very little in
their native haunts, but as this Crotalid seems to bear captivity better
than any of the others, there have been made very valuable observa-
tions in the Zoological Garden in Berlin by Rudolph Effeldt.* He
obtained four specimens, which had been born in the Zoological Garden
in London, and reared there with great success. "They became exceed-
ingly tame and gentle toward their keeper, who finally handled them
without fear in an almost reckless manner. They would take the food,
preferably fishes, but also other cold or warm blooded animals, or even
raw meat, from the forceps in the hand of the keeper. Toward other
snakes, including Rattlesnakes, they were very savage, and, curiously
enough, their bite proved dangerous to other poisonous snakes, but
not to others of their own species. They would often fight among
themselves, chiefly for a place in the water basin or during the pairing
season.

The pairing was observed by Effeldt repeatedly at various seasons,
in spring, summer, and even in the autumn as late as October 10, and
described by him in detail. A pair which he obtained in 1871 and

410 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

1872 paired on January 21, 1873, and on the following July 6 he found
8 recently-born young in the cage. They were about 260 mm. long by
15 mm. thick, and, unlike the parents, of a pale flesh color, with black-
ish brown zigzag bands. After the first molt, about two weeks after
birth, the ground color became more reddish brown, and at the next
one, about five weeks later, copper brown, the head being more brightly
colored in all stages. This color lasted into the second year, when
they gradually assumed the dark color of the parents. During the
first two weeks they took no food, then they accepted young frogs, but
refused fishes. At the end of two months they were 540 mm. long,
with a proportionally large head. The parents seemed to show some
affection for their offspring. :

Genus SISTRURUS,* Garman.
THE GROUND RATTLESNAKES.

1822.— Crotalus, FLEMING, Philos. Zool., 1, p. 294 (type C. miliaris) (not of Linn.,
1758).
1825.—Crotalophorus, GRAY, Ann. Philos., 1825 (p. 205) (not of Houttuyn, 1764).
1826.—Caudisona, FivziNGER, N. Class. Rept., p. 34 (type C. miliarius) (not of
Laurenti, 1768).
1883.—Sistrurus, GARMAN, N. Amer. Rept., I, Ophid., pp. 110, 176 (same type).
Between 1822 and 1826 several authors, led by Fleming, for the first
time undertook to subdivide the old genus Crotalus into two genera
according to the scutellation of the top of the head, but they were
very unfortunate in adopting for the ground rattlers names which had
been used before. Considerable confusion in the nomenclature of the
rattlesnakes was the result, as partly pointed out under the head of
Crotalus. S. Garman was the first to fully understand the situation,
and, in 1883, to supply a tenable name for the genus of the ground
rattlers. He has fully demonstrated the correctness of his position.t
The Ground Rattlesnakes form a small compact genus of only three
species, one of which is confined to Mexico. Their distribution in the
United States is rather curious, inasmuch that they are found in the
eastern portion east of the Rocky Mountain region proper, although
one form enters the Sierra Madre plateau, even occurring on the west-
ern slope of it in Arizona.
The two species inhabiting the United States oceupy two distinct
areas, which only overlap to a comparatively slight extent in the
Indian Territory and adjacent region.

Synopsis of the species of Sistrurus fond in the United States.

a’, Prefrontals not in contact with the loreal proper (lower loreal, if two be present) ;
a whitish stripe from posterior nasal below eye to angle of mouth (fig. 45),
b!,. Number of scale rows usually 25. ,

cl. Spots larger’-: 2-2. 522 -Ls0 25 poeta = == aan oe ee S. catenatus
o., Spots smaller. 0). sass So eee eee SESoo coe 2S. c. consors

*From the Greek ceiorpov (seistron), a rattle; ovpa (oura), a tail.
t Science, x1x., May 20, 1892, p. 290.

Pa ioe ee

alt Bik ee

ee eee eee ee

wy

~~

=e

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 411

pa NumDer oLescale Tows usually 232-2. 2... 2. 25.022 .2c2. 25s. S. ce. Edwardsit
a. Prefrontals in contact with the loreal proper; a whitish stripe from below center
Gmevedtomole or mouth (io. 4G\o. cerictcee secs nese cce cscs cease bene S. miliarius

Fig. 45. Fig. 46,
HEAD OF SISTRURUS CATENATUS. HEAD OF SISTRURUS MILIARIUS.
From side, showing color pattern. From side, showing color pattern

A pretty good character in dubious cases between S. catenatus typi-
eal and S. miliarius cousists in the pattern of the parietals. if visible.

Fig. 47. Fig. 48.
COLOR PATTERN OF TOP OF HEAD OF SISTRURUS COLOR PATTERN OF TOP OF HEAD 9F SISTRURUS
CATENATUS. MILIARIUS.

In the former there is a dark patch covering the center of the parietal
suture (fig. 47), while in the latter the light portion forms a narrow
band down the entire length of this suture (fig. 48).

THE MASSASAUGA.
Sistrurus catenatus,* (Rafinesque).
Plate 5.

1818.—Crotalinus catenatus, RAFINESQUE, Amer. Monthl. Mag., Iv, 1818, p. 41.—
Crotalus catenatus, GARMAN, N. Am. Rept., 1, Opnid., p. 118 (1883).—/Sis-
trurus catenatus, GARMAN, N. Am. Rept. 1, Ophid., p. 176 (1883).—JORDAN,
Man. Vert. North. U.S.,5ed., p. 199 (1888).—TayLor, Ann. Rep. Nebraska
State Board Agric., 1891, p. 355 (1892).—OsBORN¥, Part. Cat. Anim. Iowa,
p- 9 (1892).—H. Garman, Bull. [ll. State Lab. Nat. Hist., 11, p. 312
(1892).—H. GarMAN, Bull. Essex Inst., xxvi, 1894, p. 62.—Hay, Batr.
Rept. Indiana, p. 126 (1893).—HuRTER, Trans. Acad. Sc. St. Louis, v1, p.
258 (1893).—Crotalophorus catenatus, COPE, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus.,xrv, 1891,
p. 685 (1892).—Hay, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xv, 1894, p. 387.

1823.— Crotalus tergeminus, SAY, in Long’s Exped. Rocky Mts., 1, p.499.—HARLAN,
Journ. Phila. Acad., v, 1827, (p, 372).—Hanrwan, Phys. Med. Res., p. 135,
(1835).—DUMERIL ET BrBron, Erpét. Génér., Vil, ii, p, 1479 (1854) —CopE,
in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn., p. 125 (1861).—HayYDEN, Trans. Am.

* From the Latin catenatus, chained, chain-like.

412 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Philos. Soc., x11, 1862, p. 177.—Crotalophorus tergeminus, GRAY, Synops.
Rept., p. 78 (1830).—Gray, Cat. Snakes Brit. Mus., p. 18 (1849).—HOoL-
BROOK, N. Am. Herpet., 2 ed., 111, p. 29 (1842).—DEKay, Zool. N. Y., ul, p.
57 (1842).—Barirp and GIRARD, N. Am Serp., p. 14 (1853).—Bairp, Serp.
N.Y., p. 11 (1854).—GEBHARD, Sixth Rep., State Cab. Nat. Hist. N. Y., (p.
22) (1853).—KENNIcoTT, Trans. Ill. State Agr. Soc. 1., 1853-’54 (p. 592).—
Cope, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 336.—MAax v. Wimp, Verz. Rept. Reise
N. Amer., p. 74 (1865).—Smiru, Rept. Geol. Surv. Ohio, rv, p. 674 (1882).—
HiGcury, Trans. Wise. Acad. Se., vu, p. 161 (1884).—Caudisona tergemina,
WaGLeER, Nat. Syst. Amph., p. 176 (1830).—Copr, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
No. 1, p.34 (1875).—Cours and Yarrow, Bull. Geol. Geogr. Surv. Terr.
(Hayden’s), Iv, 1878, p. 269.—CRAGIN, Trans. Kansas Acad. Se., vu, p. 121
(1881).—Davis and Rice, Bull. Il. State Labor. Nat. Hist., 1, No.5 (p. 28)
(1883).—Davis and Rice, Bull. Chic. Acad. Se., 1, p. 28 (1883).—YaRROw,
Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus.,No. 24, pp. £2, 79 (1883).—Hay, Amph. Rept. Indiana,
p. 15, pl. 1, fig. 15 (1885).—GarNIER, Proc. Canad. Inst. Toronto (3), v,
1888, (p 255).—GiBBs, Wolver. Natural.,1, Feb., 1890, p. 12.—Ginss, For-
est and Stream, XxxIx, July 7, 1892, p. 7.
1838.—Crotalus miliarius, KIRTLAND, in Mather’s Sec. Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio, 1838,
p. 167 (not of Linn).—W. L. SciarrEr, Snakes, Ind. Mus., p. 74 (1891).
1838.—Crotalus imessasauqus, KIRTLAND, in Mather’s See. Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio,
1838, p. 190 (footnote).
1842.—Crotalophorus kirtlandi, HOLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., 2 ed., 11, p. 31.—Dx
Kay, Zool. N. Y., 11, p.57 (1842).—Gray, Cat. Snakes Brit. Mus., p. 18
(1849).—C. kirtlandii, BArrp and Grrarp, Cat. N. Am. Serp., p. 16
(1853).—KENNICOTT, Trans. Ill. State Agr. Soc., 1, 1853-54 (p.592).—
Cop, Proce. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 336.
1850.—Crotaphorus, sp., AGASSIZ, Lake Superior, p, 381.
1854.—Crotalophorus massasauga, BAIRD, Serp. N. York, p. 12.
1882.—Crotalophorus tergeminus, var. kirtlandii, SMiTH, Rep. Geol. Sury. Ohio, Iv,
p. 674.—HIGLeEY, Trans. Wisc. Acad. Se., vir, 1884, p. 161.
1882.—Crotalophorus catenatus catenatus Copn, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891 (No.
882), p. 685.—TayLor, Amer. Natural., xxvi, Sep., 1892, p. 752.
Figures.—HOLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., 2 ed., 111, pll. v, vi (1842).—AGassiz, Lake
Superior, pl. vi, figs. 6-8 (1850).—DumrRIL and Bisron, Erpét. Génér.,
Atlas, pl. LXxx1v bis, tig. 5 (1854).—Barrb, Pac. R. P. Rep., x, Rept., pl. Xv,
figs. 9, 11 (1859).—GarMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.,1, pl. 1x, fig. 2 (1883).

Description.*—Twenty-five rows of dorsal scales, strongly carinated,
with the exception of the first row, which is perfectly smooth. Vertical

OSs ax
SAR ESE
re TITEL

Fig. 49. Fig. 50.
HEAD OF SISTRURUS CATENATUS, SHOWN FROM TOP AND SIDE.

plate {frontal| subhexagonal, pointed posteriorly. Seven longitudinal
Series of blotches. A narrow band of yellowish white extends from the
pit to the neck in passing close to the angle of the mouth (figs. 49, 50).

“By C. Girard, in Baird and Girard’s N. Am. Serp., p. 14, from specimens from Wis-
consin, Michigan, and Ohio.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger. PLATE 5.

MASSASAUGA,—SISTRURUS CATENATUS.
From Holbrook, North Am. Herpetology.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 413

The ground color above is brown; the blotches are deep chestnut-
brown, blackish externally, and with a yellowish-white margin. The
dorsal blotches are 34 in number from the head to the region opposite
the anus, 26 of which are transversely and irregularly oblong, anteriorly
and posteriorly emarginated—less so, however, posteriorly; 8 are sub-
circular. Five or 6 exist on the tail from the anus to its tip, extending
on the sides, the last two forming sometimes acompletering. The next
series on either side is composed of small blotches, but as intensely
colored a8 in the other series. They alternate with the dorsal ones.
They havé no regularity either in outline or position, The second lateral
row is composed of the largest lateral blotches. They are transversely
oblong or oval on the second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth rows of scales,
and opposite the blotches of the dorsal series; consequently alternating
with third series above. The first lateral series again is composed of
blotches intermediate in size between those of the third and second
series; they occupy the first and second rows of scales, and extend
somewhat to the abdominal scutelle [ventrals, or gastrosteges], and
alternating with the adjoining series. Two undulated vitte extend
from,the supraorbital plates along the neck to the first dorsal blotch,
and often confluent with the latter. A linear vitta margined with yel-
lowish white extends from the posterior edge of the eye to the sides of
the neck; the inferior yellow margin is the broadest, and passes from
the pit close to the angle of the mouth, turning forward to the middle of
the lower jaw, inclosing a semielliptical brown patch. Two elongated
yellowish spots may be observed diverging from both sides of the pit to
the lip. The cephalic plates are deep chestnut-brown; a transverse
light brown band extends across the head from one orbit to the other.

Variation.—The ground color varies from brownish gray, through
brown, to blackish, the latter being the so-called C. hirtlandi. It
appears that specimens living in swamps and marshy places are chiefly
of the latter color. The alleged differences in the shape of the head
between Ohio and Wisconsin specimens (Smith, loc. cit.) I have been
unable to verify.

Geographical distribution.—The area inhabited, now or formerly, by
the Massasauga lies approximately between the seventy-seventh and
ninety-eighth meridians and the thirty-eighth and forty-fifth parallels.

In the State of New York they‘have been found in Genesee County,
in the western portion, draining into Lake Ontario, where their oceur-
rence in the town of Byron was recorded for the first time in 1853 by
Mr. John Gebhard. They then inhabited a white-cedar swamp con-
taining an area of about 1,000 acres. In Ohio, whence came the
types of Kirtland’s C. messasaugus (or Holbrook’s C. kirtlandi), they
are presumed to occur in all parts. It is also common in parts of
Michigan, though it must be remembered that this expression ‘ com-
mon” in all these snakes is a very indefinite term. The accessible rec-
ord may show them to have been common in a given place at the time

414 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

it was made, yet at the present day one may search long and often in
the same place and not find one. Dr. Hay says that it is yet abundant
in some localities in Indiana, but he has not been able to confirm its
occurrence south of Indianapolis. He also states that on the prairies
of [llinois, before the country became thickly populated, they were
extremely abundant, and the killing of two or three dozen of them in a
season was not an unusual thing for any farmer’s boy, while now, in that
same region, not one is seen in years. H.Garman states that it occurs
on the prairies throughout Illinois, but I can find no reliable records
for the southern part. The only place where Hurter has found it there
is the “ Wet Prairie,” near Edwardsville, Madison County, where they
seem to be common, however. The massasauga also occurs in suitable
localities in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa. Taylor quotes it as com-
mon in eastern and middle Nebraska, and the record for Kansas is
similar. Farther in the Southwest it is replaced by S. edwardsivi, In
the Northeast the Massasauga extends into Canada, where it occurs in
various localities in the peninsula of Ontario. The National Museum
has a specimen from Lucknow, by Dr. Garnier (No. 12752), and Mr.
James M. Macoun informs me that he knows of specimens from
Georgian Bay, Lake Huron, and Pelee Point, Lake Erie.

Habits—The Massasauga is emphatically a species of the prairies
and their swamps and marshes. Its life history offers as yet some
unsolved or disputed questions, but thanks to Dr. O. P. Hay’s inter-
esting studies of this species, much light has of late been thrown upon
it, and to those who want a more detailed biography I would recom.
mend his article, “The Massasauga and its Habits,” in the American
Naturalist (Vol. xx1, 1887, pp. 211-218), which also contains some
interesting observations on two specimens which brought forth living
young—one five, the other six—in captivity.

Being a comparatively small species, the maximum length probably
not exceeding 40 inches, its bite is correspondingly less dangerous
than the larger Rattlesnakes. There seems to be great diversity of
opinion, however, as to the extent of its poisonous power, for while
Dr. Kirtland asserts that the bite is scarcely more than the sting of a
hornet, the farmers fear it very much, and Dr. Hay thinks that one
Massasauga would probably be equivalent in virulence to a whole
colony of hornets, which I think is more nearly correct.

Dr. Hay also characterizes the statement that the sound of the rat-
tle of the Massasauga is so feeble that it is scarcely audible, as cer-
tainly incorrect, asserting from experience that it can be heard ata
distance of several feet. Dr. Morris Gibbs, who has examined a great
many specimens, found the largest number of rings in the rattle to be
10. The largest number in any specimen in the National Museum is 9
(No. 12752).

Dr. Taylor, writing of the Massasauga in Nebraska, states that an
examination of the contents of the stomachs of this species shows that

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. A15

its food is almost wholly made up of mice and other rodents, and he
consequently considers it decidedly useful, aside from its venomous
qualities. It seems hardly advisable, however, to suggest protection
for this species on this account, but I would advise that the farmers
spare the life of every large harmless snake on their land, and there
would be no harm in killing off every Rattler, for harmless snakes will
destroy the mice fully as well as the poisonous ones.

THE GULF-COAST MASSASAUGA.
Sistrurus catenatus consors,* (B. & G.).

1853.—Crotalophorus consors, BAIRD and GIRARD, Cat. N. Am. Serp., p. 12.—Dvu-
MERIL and BrBRON, Erpét. Génér., Vu, ii, p. 1482 (1854),—Barrp, Pac. R.
R. Rep., x, Reptiles, p. 14 (1859).

1883.—Sistrurus cateratus, var. consors, GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid.,
p. 176.

1892.—? Sistrurus catenatus, GARMAN, Bull. Essex Inst., XXIv, p. 4.

Figure.—Batrp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Rept. pl. xxrv, fig. 8 (1859).
The status of the present form is very doubtful. It was described by
Baird and Girard from a single specimen collected at Indianola, Tex.,
which now appears to be lost. The original description does not fur-
nish any very tangible character by which to separate it from typical
8. catenatus with 25 scale rows, but its scutellation is compared chiefly
with S. miliarius, which seems to indicate that it may have had the pre-
ocular and posterior nasal separated, although the otherwise so char-
acteristic color pattern of the head is that of S. catenatus. The figure
in the Pacific Railroad Report’ pl. XX1v, fig. 8], gives only the top of the
head, but the above suggestion is strengthened by that figure, which
certainly seems to show a separation of the shields mentioned by a loreal,
but whether by an upper loreal, detached from the anterior portion of the
preocular, or by a large loreal proper, is not clear, although the former
alternative seems most probable. In that case we have probably to do
with an individual variation only, and the only ground for the separa-
tion of the subspecies would be the smallness of the dorsal spots. The -
25 scale rows would then distinguish it from the subspecies S. ¢. edwardsii.
Iam inclined to think that the S. catenatus reported by Garman (Bull.
Essex. Inst., xxtv, 1892, p. 4.) from Deming’s Bridge, Matagorda County,
Tex., not very far from the type locality of S. consors, and which, like
the latter, had 25 scale rows, belong here. They have, moreover, 48 to
51 dorsal blotches.

For the sake of completeness, I add the original description by C.
Girard.

Description.—Twenty-five rows of dorsal scales, all carinated except
the two first rows on either side. Seven series of blotches, one dorsal
and 3 on each side, all very small. A yellowish white line passing from
behind the nostril below and behind the eye.

__ — —

*From the Latin consors, a partner, companion, or relative.

416 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Resembles C. miliarius in its general appearance, but without the ver-
tebral brownish red line. The ground color is olivaceous brown, the
blotches of a deeper brown, encircled with a black fillet margined with
a whitish yellow line. There are about 50 blotches in the dorsal series,
emarginated anteriorly only, 30 of which are transversely elongated,
very irregular; the 20 remaining ones nearly circular, with regular out-
lines. The blotches of the lateral rows are comparatively small and
of nearly equal size, though sometimes one of either row may appear
much the largest. The blotches of the first lateral series are opposite
to those of the dorsal and affect the first, second, and third rows of
scales and the extremities of the abdominal scutelle [ventrals, or gas-
trosteges]. The blotches of the second series alternate with these,
extending on the third, fourth, and fifth rows of scales. The blotches
of the third series are obsolete and alternate with those of the second
series, and are generally opposite to those of the dorsal series situated
in the fifth, sixth, and seventh rows. The upper surface of the head is
brown; there are 2 vitte extending from the vertex along the neck to
the first dorsal blotch. A broader and deep chestnut-brown band
extends from the eye to the neck. The frontal region is deeper brown
than the vertex. A yellowish white line starts from the nostrils near
the upper surface of the head, extending backward, in passing between
the eye and the pit, to the angle of the mouth. A vertical whitish bar
extends from each side of the pit to the labial. The belly is yellowish
white, marbled with black, transversely oblong patches. The vertical
plate [frontal] is cordiform; the anterior frontal plates [internasals] pro-
portionally small; the occipital [parietal] rather broad. The scales of
the body are elongated, a little smaller than in C. miliarius, but not
quite so acute posteriorly. The 2 lateral and smooth rows are much
broader than the rest, and conspicuous. Most of the scales of these 2
rows are black, with the posterior edge straw-colored, giving the appear-
ance of a succession of distinet crescents. The tail is conical and taper-
ing; the rattle composed of one ring besides the terminal one.

EDWARDS’ MASSASAUGA.
Sistrurus catenatus edwardsti,* (B. & G.).
Plate 6.

1853.—Crotalophorus edwardsii, BAIRD and GIRARD, Cat. N. Am. Serp., p. 15.—
DuMERIL et Bipron, Erpét. Gén., vu, ii, p. 1483 (1854).—BarrD, U. S.
Mex. Bound. Surv. Rept., p. 15 (1859).—Caudisona edwardsti, COPE, Bull.
U.S. Nat. Mus. No. 1, Check list, p. 34 (1875).

1874.—Crotalus miliarius, JAN, Icon. Ophid., livr. 46, pl. 111, fig. 6 (not of Linn).

1883. —Sistrurus miliarius, var. edwardsit, GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid.,
1, Afi

1892.—Crotalophorus catenatus edwardsii, COPE, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891,
No. 882, p. 685.—Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1892, p. 336.

* Named in honor of Dr. L. A. Edwards, U.S. A.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger.

PLATe 6.

EDWARDS’ MASSASAUGA,—SISTRURUS CATENATUS EDWARDSII.
From Baird, Rep. Mex. Bound. Sury.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 417

Figures.—BairD, Mex. Bound. Sury., 11, Rept., pl. v, fig. 1 (1859).—Barrp, Pac.
R. R. Rep., x, Rept., pl. xxv, fig. 10 (1859).—Jan, Icon. Ophid. livr. 46,
pl. 111, fig. 6 (1874).

Description.*—Twenty-three rows of dorsal scales; first aud second
lateral rows smooth. Vertical plate [frontal] subpentagonal, tapering
posteriorly. Lateral rows of blotches proportionally very small.

The ground-color is yellowish brown, with three lateral series of dee}
chestnut-brown blotches. Two elongated brown blotches extend from
the superciliaries |supraoculars] backward. A narrow band of chestnut
brown, from the posterior frontal plates [prefrontals], passes over the
eyes to the neck, under which a yellowish stripe extends from the nos-
tril to the angle of the mouth. The snout and upper jaw are brown,
with two yellow fillets diverging from the pit. The lower jaw and chin
are mottled with brown and yellow. There are about 42 dorsal brown
and irregular blotches, margined with deep black and encireled with a
yellow fillet, from the head to the tip of the tail, the thirty-fourth oppo-
site the anus, the last three passing to the sides of the tail, but do not
meet below. Subcircular on the posterior halt of the body, the blotches
on the anterior half are longer transversely than longitudinally, emargi-
nated anteriorly only.

The blotches of tie two lateral series are proportionally small.
The blotches of the upper series are more or less obsolete, and alter-
nate with the dorsal ones. Those of the second lateral series are the
smallest, and alternate also, being of as deep a color as the dorsal
ones, but do not extend beyond the anus, occupying the second, third,
and fourth rows of scales. The first and lower series affect the first
aud second rows and only one seale. The belly is of a light straw color,
dotted and sprinkled irregularly with brown.

Scales elliptical, subtruncated posteriorly, constituting 23 rows,
strongly carinated, except the two lateral rows, which are smooth

Head, when scen from above, subelliptical; vertical plate [frontal]
proportionally more e‘ongated than in C, tergeminus [=S. catenatus].

Numnber of -eutrals[gastrosteges], 143 to 153; of caudals [urosteges|,
24 to 31; scale rows across middle of body, 23.

Variation.—The chief variation in scutellation | have found in this
subspecies consists in the occasional separation of the anterior prolon-
gation of the preoecular so as to form an upper loreal separating the
preocular from the posterior nasal.

In coloration there is considerable difference between the specimens,
chiefly consisting in an obliteration of the markings on top of the head,
thus obseuring the characteristic dark spot on the middle of the parietal
suture.

Geographical distribution—The present subspecies represents the
typical Massasauga in the Southwest. Curiously enough it does not

*Original deseription by C. Girard in Baird and Girard’s N. Am, Serp., p. 15,
from specimens Nos. 506-508, U.S. Nat. Mus,
[l, Mis, 184, pt, 2——27

418 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

extend further north than the southern limit of the latter. It is found
from Indian Territory through western Texas to the Mexican border.
Its known range has recently been extended a considerable distance
west, as Dr. Timothy E. Wilcox has sent a specimen from Fort Hua-
chuea, Ariz.

Habits.—Nothing is definitely known, but the habits are probably
similar to those of the typical form, though it may have to be satisfied
with more arid localities.

THE GROUND RATTLESNAKE.
Sistrurus miliarius,* (Linneus).
Plate 7.

1766.—Crotalus miliarius, LINN&US, Syst. Nat., 12 ed., 1 (p. 372).—DAUDIN,
Hist. Nat. Rept., v, p. 328 (1803).—Say, Am. Journ. Sce., 1, 1819, p. 263.—
HartaN, Journ., Phila. Acad., v, 1827 (p. 370).— HARLAN, Phys. Med. Res.
(p.134) (1835).—ScHLEGEL, Ess. Phys. Serp.,1, p. 193; U1, p. 569 (part)
(1837).—Hotsrook, N. Am. Herpet., 1 ed., 11, p. 73 (1838).—DUMERIL et
BrIBRON, Erpét. Génér., vu, ii, p. 1477 (1854).—JAN, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1859,
extr., p. 28.—JAN, Elenc. Sist. Ofid., p. 124 (1863).—Copr, in Mitchell’s
Res. Ven. Rattlesn., p. 124 (1861).—GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., I,
Ophid., p.119 (1883).—Crotalophorus miliarius, GRAY, Ann. Philos., 1825
(p. 205).—Gray, Cat. Sn. Brit. Mus., p. 17 (1849).—Ho.brook, N. Am. Her-
pet., 2 ed., 11, p. 25 (1842).—De Kay, Zool. N. Y., 111, p.57 (1842).—BatrRp
and GIRARD,Cat. N. Am. Serp., p. 11 (1853).--Le ConTE, South. Med. Surg.
Journ., IX, 1853, pp. 651, 652.—HALLOWELL, in Sitgreave’s Exp. Zuni
Colo. Riv., p. 147 (1854).—Bairp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Whipple’s Route,
p. 40 (1859).—Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 336.—Copr, Proce. U. S.
Nat. Mus., X1,1888, p. 393.—PuTNAM, Amer. Natural. ,11, 1868, p. 134.—Hay,
Proc. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., xv, 1892, p. 388.—Caudisona miliaria, FITZINGER,
N. Class. Rept., p. 63 (1826).—C. miliarius, GRAY, Zool. Miscell., p. 51
(1842).—Copr, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No.1, Check list, p. 34 (1875).—Cope,
Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., xvul, 1877, p. 64.—Copr, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No.
17, p. 24 (1880).—Covurs and Yarrow, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1878, p. 26.—
True, in Hammond’s South Carolina, p. 235 (1883).—YarRrow, Bull.
U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, pp. 12, 78 (1883).—Sistrurus miliarius, GARMAN, N.
Am. Rept., 1, Ophid., p. 177, (1883).—GaRMAN, Bull. Essex Inst., xx, 1887,
p. 123.—GARMAN, Bull. Essex Inst., xxiv, 1892, p.4.—L@NNBERG, Proc.
U.S. Nat, Mus., xvi, 1894, p. 335.

1799.—Crotalus miliaris, BEAUVotIs, Trans. Am. Philos. Soc., Iv, p. 367.

Figures. —CAtTESBY, Carol., 11 (pl. XL1r) (1743).—ScuLEGEL, Ess. Phys. Serp., Atlas,
pl. Xx, figs. 17, 18 (1837). —HoLprook, N. Am. Herpet., 1 ed., 11, pl. xv (1838).—
Horsrook, N. Am. Herpet., 2 ed., 111, pl. rv (1842).—BarrD, Pac. R. R. Rep.,
x, Rept., pl. xxiv, fig. 7 (1859).

Description.t—Twenty-two or 23 dorsal rows of scales, all of which
are carinated, the lateral and first row but slightly; a vertebral brown-
ish red line; 7 series of blotches, 1 dorsal and 3 lateral, on each side,
the laste most of which is obsolete, and the lowest subieeee to irregular-

* From the age miliarius, ae like, ane ee hike Sas
t Description by C. Girard, in Baird and Girard’s N. Am. Serp., p. 11, from speci-
mens Nos. 498-502, U. 8S. Nat. Mus,

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger.

PLATE 7

GROUND RATTLESNAKE,—SISTRURUS MILIARIUS.

From a cast in the U. 8. National Museum.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 419

ities. Vertical plate [frontal] subcordiform, occipital [parietal] oblong
and elongated. A narrow white line commences at the lowest point of
the orbit and passes obliquely backward to the angle of the mouth.
Ground color dark grayish ash, minutely mottled. A series of 38 to 45
subcireular dorsal blotches extending from head to tail, dark brown,
each with a narrow, distinet yellowish border. Interval rather nar-
rower than the spots themselves. A broad band of purplish red passes
from head to tail through the blotches. On each side may be distin-
guished three series of blotches, the first on the first and second lateral
rows of scales and partly on the abdominal scutell |ventrals or gas-
trosteges|; the second alternating with this on the second, third, fourth,
and fifth rows of scales, and opposite the dorsal series; the third alter-
nating with the second and the dorsal series on the fifth, sixth, seventh,
and eighth rows of scales. The latter series is dusky and obsolete; the
others are uniform and distinctly black.

The shape of the blotches is subjected to some variation, according
to individuals. -Generally subcircular or slightly oblong, they become
sometimes a transversely elongated quadrangle, three times as long as
wide. Their shape varies according to the region of the body on which
they are found. On the anterior third they are subquadrangular,
anteriorly and posteriorly emarginated; on the middle region they elon-
gate, and toward the posterior third become nearly circular. Backward
of the arms the five or six blotches of that region extend on the sides,
without, however, meeting on the lower surface. The blotches of the
first lateral row are subquadrangular and a little smaller than those of
the second and third rows, the blotches of the second row being trans-
versely oblong and largest on the middle region of the body. Side of
the head purplish brown, a narrow, distinct white line from the lowest
part of the orbit passing obliquely backward to the angle of the mouth.
Above and continuous with that white line a deep chestnut-brown
vitta is observed, of the same length but broader, and lined above
with a narrow, dull, yellowish margin. Two undulated dark brown
vitte extend from the vertex to the first dorsal blotch and confluent
with it. A double crescentic blotch is observed on the frontal scutelle
{internasals and prefrontals], leaving a transversal fulvous band across
the head between the orbits. The color underneath is reddish yellow,
marmorated with brownish biack blotches and minute dots.

The seales are elongated, carinated, and acute posteriorly. Those of
the lateral row are slightly carinated also, but narrower than in 0.
consors, and more acute posteriorly.

Number of ventrals [gastrosteges], 132 to 136; of caudals [urosteges],
27 to 36; scale rows, 21 to 23.

The greatest number of joints to any rattle of this species in the
U.S. National Museum is nine.

Variation—While the scutellation of this species appears rather
constant, there is considerable variation in color, inasmuch as speci-

420 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

mens from moist localities appear much darker, often quite blackish
with large spots, while in those from more arid districts the ground
color ismuch paler, and the markings more restricted. There is also a.
certain amount of variation with regard to the red dorsal stripe, which
seems to be wanting in the young.

Geographical distribution—Holbrook asserts that on the Atlantic
coast this species does not occur north of the thirty-fifth parallel, and
I am aware of no later record which contradicts this. In fact, the most
northerly record I have been able to find seems to be that of Drs.
Coues and Yarrow (Proc. Phila. Acad., 1878, p. 26) from the neighbor-
hood of Fort Macon in North Carolina, a little south of the. latitude
mentioned. They write that a few individuals are said to have been
seen on Bogue banks; none, however, observed or secured by them;
but that they are quite common on Shackleford banks, a few miles from
Fort Macon, and that it has also been taken on the mainland. The
ground rattler is found south of this point along the coasts of North
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. In the latter State it
is distributed all over the peninsula and along the Gulf coast to Ala-
bama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. It ascends the Mississippi River
Valley and the valleys of its southern tributaries, but curiously enough
seems to be more common on the western side of the great river, being
apparently common in Arkansas and Indian Territory even as far west
as central Oklahoma, whence the National Museum has a young speci-
men collected by Dr. Edward Palmer at Old Fort Cobb.

In Texas Prof. Cope has recorded it as oceurring at Dallas; Mr.
Ragsdale has coliected it in Cooke County, and Capt. Pope brought a
specimen (No. 494) home from the head waters of the Colorado River,
at about the one hundred and first meridian. On the coast,of Texas
Mr. Garman has recently.recorded it (Bull. Essex Inst., xxiv, 1892)
from Matagorda County.

Habits.—The Ground Rattler appears to prefer dry ground, and Hol-
brook states that itis found among leaves, and frequently in high grass
in search of small field mice, on which it feeds.

The only observation about its breeding habits of which I am aware
is a note by Prof. F. W. Putnam in the American Naturalist (Vol. 11,
1868, p. 134) that he had once dissected a specimen having 14 eggs, all
with embryos two inches in length in the oviduct.

According to Holbrook the common people dread the ground rattler
and consider it much more destructive than the Banded Rattiesnake,
both on account of its greater aggressiveness, the scant warning Its
faint rattling affords, and the supposed greater activity of its venom.
He, however, satisfied himself by experiments of the fallacy of the
alleged greater virulence of its poison, for while he found it sufficient
to kill small birds, or field mice, repeated bites failed to affect a cat
beyond causing it to droop for thirty-six hours, at the end of which
time the effects of the poison entirely disappeared.

While thus the bite of these small snakes may be attended with com-

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 421

paratively little danger, a person bitten would act very foolishly were he
to neglect to pay proper attention to the wound and to apply as soon
as possible proper remedies, as otherwise he might pay dearly enough
for his carelessness. ,

Although, as a rule, not fatal to man, the Ground Rattler is not harm-
less enough to secure it against destruction wherever it may be found.
It is undoubtedly usefulin destroying a great quantity of small rodents,
but the protection of the other innocuous snakes will compensate for
the killing of any number of Ground Rattlers.

Genus CROTALUS* Linn.
THE RATTLESNAKES.

1758.—Crotalus, LINNZUS, Syst. Nat., 10 ed., I, p. 214 (type C. horridus).

1764.—Crotalophorus, HouTTUYN, Linn. Natuurl. Hist., vi, p. 290 (emend.),.

1768.—Caudisona, LAURENTI, Syn. Rept., p. 92 (same type).

1818.—Crotalinus, RAFINESQUE, Am. Month. Mag., 111 (p. 446), Iv, p.41 (emend.).

1830.— Uropsophus, WAGLER, Syst. Amph., p. 176 (type C. triseriatus).

1843.— Urocrotalon, FITZINGER, Syst. Rept., p. 29 (type C. durissus Linn.).

1861.—Aploaspis, Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1861, p. 206 (type C. lepida).

1875.—Aichmophrys, Cours, Wheeler's Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 609 (type C.
cerastes). ;

1883.—Haploaspis, Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1883, p. 18 (emend.).

There has, at various times, been some confusion in the application
of the generic terms of this and the following genus. From 1861 to
1875 Prof. Cope used Laurenti’s Caudisona for the present group,
restricting Crotalus to the Ground Rattlers, following Fleming’s example
of 1822. In 1875, however, he suddenly reversed the two names,
employing Caudisona for the Ground Rattlers. This latter has later
been exchanged for Crotalophorus, as will be shown under the follow-
ing genus.

The case is very simple. When Linnzeus, in 1758, first applied the
binominal nomenclature he did not Know or name any of the ground
rattlers, consequently the name Crotalus can only be used as done
here. Houttuyn’s Crotalophorus is identical with Linnei Crotalus of
the tenth edition of his Systema Nature, being, in fact, simply an
emendation and, therefore, nothing but a synonym. The status of
Laurenti’s Caudisona is exactly similar.

The geographical distribution of the genus Crotalus is highly inter-
esting.

Jointly with the other genus, Sistrurus, the Rattlesnakes are peculiar
to the New World. Their center of distribution appears to be the table-
land of Mexico with its extension northward into the southwestern
United States, at least 8 out of a total of the 17 species constituting
the genus Crotalus occurring at, or near, the boundary between the
United States and the Mexican Republic.

*From the Greek Kporanov (Krotalon), a rattle.

422 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

)
LOS —

NN, (| |
A. Kr

a
Oe i : ae,
mar TART

)
i
i PL) Same

Fig. 52.

RATA]
ues Cory os V4,

Ie!
ine

DORSAL COLOR PATTERN OF CROTALUS
CONFLUENTUS.

DORSAL COLOR PATTERN OF CROTALUS LEPIDUS.

Ne)

No rattlesnake occurs in any of
the West India Islands proper, and
only one species appears to be con-
fined to South America, where also
another species occurs, the range of
which, however, extends into south-
ern Mexico.

Within the United States not less
than ten species, with several sub-
species, are found; but their dis-
tribution within that area is very
uneven. Thus, while there are but.
tew localities in whick Rattlesnakes

Ss do not oceur, or did not occur before

they were exterminated by man, yet
the area inhabited by more than one
species of Crotalus is comparatively
very limited. Thus in the southeast
the range of the Diamond Rattle-
snake, C. adamanteus, is overlapped
to a great extent by that of the
sanded Rattlesnake, C. horridus,
while in the center of the Union
there is another limited area in-
habited by two species, viz, the
Banded Rattlesnake, C. horridus,
und the Prairie Rattler, C. con-
fluentus.

As we approach the Mexican
boundary and the northward exten-
sion of the Sierra Madre the density
of the distribution of the species
increases rapidly, until in southern
Arizona we find no less than 7 dif-
ferent species of Rattlesnakes, viz:
C. molossus, C. atrox, C. confluentus,
C. tigris, C. cerastes, C. lepidus, and
C. mitchellii pyrrhus, out of a total of
10 species inhabiting the entire area
of the United States.

North of our northern boundary
only two species of Crotalus extend
a short distance into the British
possessions, in the western part C.
lucifer and in the central portion C.
confluentus.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 423

Wostri(

Fig. 55.
HEAD OF CROTALUS, FROM SIDE.
iInfralabials; J loreal; 71 lower loreal; 12 upper loreal; n! anterior nasal; n? posterior nasal; p
preocular; r rostral; s supralabials; s! 1st supralabial; s? 2d supralabial; so supraocular.

nostrit
if : nostril

Fig. 57.
Fig. 56, HEAD OF CROTALUS MITCHELLII FROM FRONT.
“FRONT VIEW OF PRECEDING FIGURE. (See explanation of Fig. 55.)

Synopsis of the species of Crotalus occurring in North America north of Mexico.

a' Anterior nasal in contact with rostral (figs. 55, 56).
b' Upper preocular not divided vertically (figs. 55, 56).
c! External border of supraocular not produced into a horn-like process (figs.

55, 56).
d' Dark spots on back with two symmetrical light spots, one on each side of
media bac (ie WON eee, owe ncn oe een Sociale C. molossus.
d? Dark spots on back, solid, or with only one median light spot.
e' Dorsal pattern, consisting of dark chevron bands (fig. 52)... .-. C, horridus.

e? Dorsal pattern, consisting of more or less squarish spots or straight cross
bands (figs. 53, 54).
f! Rostral at least as high as wide (fig. 63).
g Light postsuperciliary line reaches the second scale row above com-
missure at least two scales anterior to angle of mouth (fig. 58).
h' A well-defined vertical white line on first labial and anterior nasal,
occupying the posterior half of the latter (fig. 58) ..C. adamanteus.
h? No white line on first labial and nasal, which are uniform in color
and more or less dusted over with minute blackish dots.

i! Predominant color grayish-brown .........-.-..--------- C. atrox,
i Predominant color reddish-brown ......----..----. C. atrox ruber.

g*? Light postsuperciliary line reaches the second scale row above commis-
sure at corner of mouth or not at all (figs. 59, 60).
h' Light postsuperciliary line one scale wide; dark postocular patch

starts from below anterior angle of eye (fig. 59)....C. conflwentus.
h? Light postsuperciliary line two scales wide; dark postocular patch
starts from below center of eye (fig. 60) ..--..-.------ C. lucifer.
Aeunosoralewideribhan hich (iio. 6l)) a ..c.ca- ose cece cence C. tigris.

ce? External border of supraocular produced into a horn-like process
(Gir ON Raseeor = Seo Boro Oo COE C ORC Te Cee Sateen oe C. cerastes.
b? Upper preocular divided vertically (fig. 62) ..---.-----........-.---- C. lepidus.

a Anterior nasal separated from rostral by scales (fig. 63).

DGTP Cem nani) COLOR AVRUtIS Ns ote a ee ahic,a=n s.n\cls woviclo a dsels eee e-sisie'<e C. mitchellit.

b? Predominant color red ........... Geet ct a sece maces -.C, mitchellii pyrrhus.

424 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Fig. 58.

rst
yyy
or

Fig. 59. Fig. 60.
COLOR PATTERN OF SIDE OF HEAD OF CROTALUS COLOR PATTERN OF SIDE OF HEAD OF CROTALUS
CONFLUENTUS. LUCIFER.

an

i
Fig. 61. .
DIAGRAM OF LOW Fig. 62. Fig. 63.
ROSTRAL. HEAD OF CROTALUS LEPIDUS FROM SIDE. DIAGRAM OF HIGH ROSTRAL.
h Height; w width. (See explanation of Fig. 55.) h Height; w width.

THE DOG-FACED RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus molossus,* Baird & Girard.
eAle (sis

1853.— Crotalus molossus, BAIRD and GIRARD, N. Am. Serp., p. 10.—BairD, Mex.
Bound. Surv., 11, Rept., p. 14 (1859).—Copk, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p.
338.—CopE, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, p.33 (1875).—Cork, in Wheeler’s
Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 533 (1875).—Copx, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1883, p.
12.—CopkE, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891, p. 689 (1892).—YarRrow, Bull.
U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, pp. 12, 78 (1883).—GaRMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.,
1, Ophid., p. 113, (1883).—Caudisona molossus, COVE, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven.
Rattlesn., p. 124, (1861).—-Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1866, pp. 307, 308.—
COUuES, in Wheeler’s Sury. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 605 (1875).

1854.—Crotalus ornatus, HALLOWELL, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1854, (p. 192).—Hat-
LOWELL, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Parke’s Route, p. 23 (1859).—Copk, Proce.
Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 338.

1883.— Crotalus durissus, var. molossus, GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid.,
Delile

Figures. —BatRpD, Mex. Bound. Surv., u, Rept., pl. 11 (1859).—Barrp, Pac. R. R.

Rep., x, Rept., pl. xxiv, fig.5.—HALLOWELL, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, pl. 11 (1859).

*From the Greek yodocodc or Latin molossus, the Molossian wolfdog, bulldog.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger. PLATE 8.

DoG-FACED RATTLESNAKE,—CROTALUS MOLOSSUS.
From Hallowell, Pacific R. R. Rep.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 425

Description.*—Muzzle broad; rostral small. Seales between super-
ciliaries [supraoculars|] small, uniform, except the two anterior. Two
frontal plates [internasals|, 4 postfrontal [prefrontals|, 2 intersupercil-
iary [interorbitals],allin contact. Five rows scales between the labials
and suborbital row; middle row not extending beyond the middle of
the orbit; labials, 18 above, fifth and sixth largest; 17 below. Dorsal
rows of scales, 29; two external rows, small. Tail uniform black. Color
roll sulphur; a series of chestnut-brown transverse lozenges |fig. 53|
with exterior corners produced to the abdomen; centers of lozenges
with one or two spots; each scale but one color; a brown patch below
and behind the eye.

One of the most strongly marked of all species. Head very broad in
front; outline nearly rectangular. Rostral small. Two anterior front-
als [internasals]; behind these, four plates, the exterior resting on the
superciliary; behind these two other plates, between and in contact
with the superciliaries [supraorbitals|. Anterior nasal subtriangular.
Top of head with numerous smooth subtuberculous scales. Suborbitals
large, extending to the anterior canthus. General aspect smoother than
in crotali generally; scales rounded at the posterior apex, carinated but
shghtly. ;

General color above, that of roll sulphur; beneath, pale yellowish;
posteriorly, very faintly clouded with brownish. Tail black. Anteri-
orly the scutelle [ventrals, or gastrosteges| are entirely immaculate.
Along the back is a series of transverse reddish or chestnut-brown
lozenges embraced in a width of 12 or 14 scales and 4 or 5 seales long,
and with the exterior angles produced to the abdomen [fig. 53].
These lozenges are frames with the outline generally one scale in
width and with the centers of the ground color; sometimes divided by
a median line of brown so as to show two yellowish spots inside of the
lozenges. ‘The scales exterior to the lozenges are rather lighter.
Sometimes the brown rings and the lozenges widen at the abdomen
and indicate lateral spots of four scales; at others, and especially ante-
riorly, the rings are obsolete and the brown is in a dorsal series. In
fact for the anterior fourth of the body we have a dorsal patch of brown
showing alternately, at successive intervals, one large yellowish spot
and then a pair of smaller ones, owing to the confluence of the sue-
cessive lozenges. ‘The superciliaries and seales anterior to them, as
well as broad patch below and behind the eye, light greenish-brown.
Tail uniform dark-brown above, paler beneath.

A remarkable character of this species is that each individual scale
is of the same uniform tint to its base, and not showing two colors as
in other species.

Variation.—The head scutellation of the present species is exceed-
ingly variable. I have seen about nine specimens, hardly two of which

* Original description by S. F. Baird, in Baird and Girard’s N. Am. Serp., p. 10,
from a specimen from New Mexico, U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 485.

426 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

are alike in that respect. In all of them the snout is covered above
with large shields, which sometimes extend to between the orbits, but
their number and mutual relation is very variable, and often they are
more or less separated by small scales. The size and shape of the ros-
tral also varies, and the rows of scales between eye and labials vary
between 4 and 6. ;

The coloration of this undoubtedly our most beautifully tinted crotalid
is more stable. The chief variations consist in the greater or lesser
degree of definition of the spots, and in the color of the tail, which in
most specimens is solidly blackish though in a few it presents alter-
nating cross bands of black and light color.

Geographical distribution.—In the main the range of C. molossus, at
least within the borders of the United States, coincides with that of C.
lepidus, being confined to the States and Territories bordering upon the
Mexican frontier.

It was first described from a specimen collected at Santa Rita del
Cobre, near the present Fort Bayard, in New Mexico, and not far from
that locality it has since been taken by Prof. Cope. Henshaw procured
it in southern Arizona, probably not far from Fort Buchanan, whence
the Museum got a specimen from Dr. Irwin, while quite recently Dr.
Thimothy E. Wilcox has sent it from Fort Huachuca. ‘Two specimens,
collected by Dr. E. Coues on San Francisco Mountain, Arizona, were
identified by Cope as the present species. C. lepidus has not been found
so far from the Mexican boundary. Therange into Mexico is unknown.

The Texan specimen, upon which Hallowell based the C. ornatus, was
collected by Dr. Heermann at the Pecos River, en route between El
Paso and San Antonio, and is so far the only specimen obtained in
Texas.

Habits.—Nothing is known of its habits, except that it is found
among rocks.

THE BANDED RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus horridus,* Linnzeus.

Plate 9.

1758.—Crotalus horridus, LINNZUS, Syst. Nat.,.10 ed., 1, p. 214.—LInn mus, Syst.
Nat., 12 ed., 1, p. 372 (1766).—LECONTE, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1853 (p.
417).—Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 338.—Copzr, Bull. U. S. Nat.
Mus., No.1, Check-list, p. 383 (1875).—Copr, in Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100
Mer., Vv, p. 534 (1875).—Copr, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., x1v, 1891 (No. 3682),
p. 693 (1892).—YaRROw, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, Check List, pp. 12,
74 (1883).—CRAGIN, Trans. Kansas Acad. Se., vu, p. 121 (1881).—GarR-
MAN, N. Am. Rept. Batr.,1, Ophid., pp. 115, 174, pl. rx, fig. 1 (1883).—
GARMAN, List. N. Am. Rept. Batr., p. 35 (1884).—TRvuE, in Hammond’s
South Carolina, p. 235 (1883).—Davis and Rick, Bull. Ill. State Lab.
Nat. Hist., 1, No. 5, 1883 (p.27).—Davis and Ricr, Bull. Chic. Acad.
Se., 1, p. 28 (1883).—Hay, Amph. Rept. Indiana, p.13 (1885).—Hay,
Batr. Rept. Indiana, p. 128 (1893).—JORDAN, Man. Vert. North. U. 8.,5

*From the Latin horridus, horrible, terrible.

PLATE 9.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger.

‘TaMESN] [BUONRN “GS 99 Ul 4SBO B UOT
“SNGINYOH SNIVLOYO—'SYAVNSSILLVY GSGNVG

é
—
=

a

ah

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 427

ed., p. 199 (1888).—BARRINGER, Ven. Rept. U. S., p. 4 (1891).—H. Gar-
MAN, Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist., 1m, p. 311 (1892).—H. Garman, Bull.
Ess. Inst., XX v1, 1894, p. 36.—Crotalophorus horridus, Hourruyn, Linn.
Natuur. Hist., vi, p. 309 (1764).—Caudisona horrida, FLEMING, Philos.
Zool., U1, p. 294 (1822).—Corr, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn., p. 122
(1861).—Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 309.—CovuEs, Proc. Phila.
Acad., 1871, p. 48.

1768. caidiowa durissus, LAURENTI, Syn. a ne p. 93 (in part only).—Crotalus
durissus, GMELIN, Syst. Nat., 1, iii, p. 1081 (in part only) (1788).—
LATREILLE, Hist. Nat. Rept., 11, - 190 (1802).—DauDIN, Hist. Nat.
Rept., v, p. 304, pl. Lxvin, fig. 1, 2 (1803).—HARLAN, Journ. Phil. Acad.,
v, 1827, p. 368.—HaRLAN, Med. Phys. Res. (p. 1385) (1835).—SCHLEGEL,
Ess. Phys. Serp., 1, p.192; 11, p. 565 (1837).—KIRTLAND, in Mather’s
Sec. Rep. Geol. Sury., Ohio, pp. 167, 189 (1838).—SToRER, Rep. Rept.
Mass., p. 233 (1839).—Hocsrook, N.Am. Herp., 1 ed., 11, p.81, pl. xvm
(1838) ; 2 ed., 111, p. 9, pl. 1 (1842).—DrKay, Zool.N. Y., 11, p, 55 (1842),—
THompson, Hist. Vermont, I, p. 118 (1842).—Bairp and GiRArD, Cat.
N. Am. Serp., p. 1(1853).—LEConTE, South. Med. Surg. Journ., 1x, 1853,
pp. 651, 663.—Barrb, Serp. N. York, p.9 (1854).—Barrp, Pac. R. R. Rep.,
x, Reptiles,p. 14, pl. xx1v, fig. 1 (1859).—Barrp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, 35th
Par., Whipple’s Route, p. 39 (1859). —DuME&EnriLet Brnron, Erpét. Gén., vii,
p. 1465 (1854).—Krnnicort, Trans. Ill. State Agr. Soc., 1853-1854, I (p.
592).—JAN, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1859, Extr., p. 28.—JAN, Elenc. Sist. Ofid., p.
123 (1863).—Foaa, Sec. Ann. Rep. Nat. Hist. Geol. Maine, p. 141 (1863).—
VERRILL, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., 1x, 1863, p. 197.—Hoy, Smith-
son. Rep., 1864, p. 485.—ALLEN, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., 1869, pp.
179, 203.—SmiTH, Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio, Iv, 1882, p.672.—HIGLry,
Trans. Wise. Acad. Se., vil, 1884, p. 161. :

1799.— Crotalus boiquira, Brauvois, Trans. Am. Philos. Soc., Iv, p. 368, pl. fac. p.
380, low. fig.

1802.—Crotalus atricaudatus, LATREILLE, Hist. Nat. Rept., 11, p. 209.—Daupin,
Hist. Nat. Rept., v, p. 316 (1803).

1818.—Crotalinus cyanurus, RAFINESQUE, Amer. Month. Mag., 11 (p. 446); Iv,
p. 41.

1859.— ? Crotalus durissus, var. concolor, JAN, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1859, Extr., p. 28.

1859.— Crotalus durissus, var. melanurus, JAN, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1859, Extr., p. 28.

1883.—Crotalus horridus, var. atricaudatus, GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid.,
lees etoile

Figures: CavTesBy, Carolina, 11, pl. XL (1743).—LACcHPEDE, Quad. Ovip. Serp., 1

(pl. xvitt, figs. 1, 3) (1789).—BoNNATERRE, Ophiol., (pl. 1, fig. 3) (1790).—
SHaw, Gen. Zool., 11, pl. LXxxvuiir (1802).—DAuDIN, Hist. Nat. Rept., pl.
Lxviul, figs. 1, 2 (1803).—GuERIN, Icon. Régne Anim., (pl. xx1n, fig. 2)
(1829’38).—ScHLEGEL, Ess. Phys. Serp., Atlas, pl. xx, figs. 15, 16 (1837).—
Hotsrook, N. Amer. Herpet., 1 ed., 11, pl. Xv (1838) ; 2 ed., m1, pl. 1 (1842).—
DrKay, Zool. N. York, 1, pl. 1x, fig. 19 (1842).—Bairp, Serp. N. York, pl. 1,
fig. 1 (1854).—DuMEriL et Bipron, Erpét. Gén., Atlas, pl. Lxxxtv bis, fig. 1
(1854).—Batrp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, pl. xxrv, fig. 1 (1859).—JAN, Icon. Ophid.
livr. 46, pl. 1, figs. 1, 2 (1874).— GaRMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid., pl. 1x,
fig. 1 (1883).—BreEum’s Thierleben, 3 ed., v1, p. 440 (1892).

Description.*—Head angular. Seales between the superciliaries
small, numerous, uniform. Plates above snout, 2 anterior frontal |inter-
nasals| and 5 postfrontal |prefrontals].. Suborbital chain Se Gann: of

* By S. F. Baird, ici a specimen from Huntingdon Co., Pe snnsylvania, U. 8. Nat.
Mus., No. 245. Baird & Girard, N. Am. Serp., pp. 1-2.

428 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

large scales: two rows between this and labials. Labials 12 to 14
above, fifth largest; 13 tol5 below. Rows of scales on the back 23 to
25, all carinated: carination on outer row obsolete. Tail black. Above
sulphur-brown, with 2 rows of confluent brown lozenges. Light line
from superciliary to angle of the mouth; behind this a dark patch (figs.
- 64, 65),

Head above covered with small subtuberculous scales. Superciliaries
(supraoculars) large. Anterior frontals (internasals) large, triangular,
emarginated behind to receive a series of three small plates. A single
subhexagonal plate between the superciliary (supraocular) and anterior

Fig. 64. Fig. 63.
HEAD OF CROTALUS HORRIDUS, TOP VIEW. HEAD OF CROTALUS HORRIDUS, SIDE VIEW.
(After Baird, ) (After Baird, )

frontal (internasal). The exterior plate of the posterior frontal (pre-
frontal) row is much the largest, and is in contact with the super-
Ciliaries (supraoculars). A series of 3 or 4 large flat scales extend
from the posterior extremity of the superciliary (supraocular). Scales
on the cheeks (temporals) very large, truncate. Anterior orbitals
(preoculars) double; the upper one rectangular, elongated longitudi-
nally, separated from the (posterior) nasal by 2 small plates (loreals).
General color above that of roll sulphur; beneath, whitish yellow.
Along the back is a double series of subrhomboidal blotches, looking
as if they had been in contact, and then the line of junction partially
effaced for the 3 or 4 central rows. (See fig. 52.) The impression
conveyed of the color of these blotches is that of coarse mottlings of
soot or gunpowder grains, more crowded exteriorly. There are 21 of
these blotches from the head to the anus, the tail being entirely black.
The rhomboids are inclosed within about 12 dorsal series of seales.
Directly opposite to these spots on each side is a series of subtrian-
gular blotches similarly constituted as to color, and extending from the
abdomen to about the fifth lateral row, and some 6 or 7 scales long.
Anteriorly these are distinct from the dorsal series, but posteriorly
they are confluent with them, forming a series of zigzag blotches across
the body. The scutelle below show more or less of the grain-like
mottlings. Posteriorly the yellow of the body is suffused with darker.
There are no narkings of lines distinctly visible on the sides of the
head. In thecenter of the spaces between the dorsal and lateral series
of blotches are indications of small obselete spots, and in some cases

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 429

the yellow scales external to the blotches are of a lighter color than
the rest.

Number of ventrals (gastrosteges), 166; of subcaudals (urosteges), 25;
dorsal scale rows, 23.

T«tal length, 42 inches; tail, 5 inches.

Variation.—There 1s considerable individual variation, both in
scutellation of the head and the ground color of the body. _

The variation in the scutellation on top of the head is especially
marked with regard to the prefrontals and the scales covering the can-
thus rostralis. Normally the large plates consist of 2 internasals, 2
supraoculars, and between these, on each side, a large shield, the pre-
frontals usually being small scales like those covering the rest of the
head. In two of eur specimens, however (Nos. 277 and 12748), there
are a pair of large prefrontals following the internasals, while in Nos.
277 and 248 there are 2 scutes between the internasal and the supra-
ocular on each side instead of 1. :

The ground color varies greatly from light yellowish and light red-
dish gray through brown to almost black in some instances. In old
specimens the tail is generally uniform black, but in the young ones it
is banded light and black. In many specimens trom localities in the
Alleghany Mountains, with a moist climate, this black of the tail and
sometimes even of the entire posterior half of the body is often of a deep
velvety gloss.

In the majority of the Western specimens there is a broad, ill-defined,
but very distinct, ochraceous band running down the center of the
back. Most of them also have the postocular dark band darker and
better defined than Eastern specimens; but I have been unable, with
my material, to draw any line sufficiently constant.

(reographical distribution.—In former times the Banded Rattlesnake,
or * Timber Rattlesnake,” as it is often called in regions where other
species also occur, was commonly distributed in suitable localities all
over the eastern United States, except the peninsula of Florida, as far
west as the subarid portion of the Great Plains, but they have now
become exterminated or nearly so, in many localities, having been
driven back to the wilderness by the advancing cultivation of the
country.

Prof. Verrill (Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., 1x, 1863, p. 197), speaking
of the reptiles of: Norway, Me., states that it is rare, and only found in
Albany and Raymond; he had never detected it east of the Androscog-
gin River. In Massachusetts, according to Allen (Proc. Boston Soc.
Nat. Hist., x11, 1868, p. 179), itis not unfrequent on Mount Tom, and
oceasionally killed on rocky hills in several of the towns near or adjoin-
ing Springfield; it also occurs at a few similar localities in the eastern
part of the State.

In 1886 Prof. A. S. Packard had an article in the American Natu-
raliston “ The Rattlesnake in New England” (Vol. xx, pp. 736-737) trom
which I quote the following:

430 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

We have been told that Rattlesnakes are still occasionally killed in Connecticut
near the Rhode Island border. It is generally stated that the last Rattlesnake was
killed in Rhode Island twenty years ago, but we are informed by Prof. Battey that
one was killed at Tiverton, R. I., within a period of four years. Its skin is now in
the museum of the Friends’ School at Providence. Mr. Henry H. Buxton, a member
of this school, from Peabody, Mass., gives us the following statement regarding its
occurrence at that locality:

“In South Peabody there is a rock called Rattlesnake Rock, surrounded by woods
in which there are a great many snakes, including the Rattlesnake. During the last
year three or four have been killed by different persons. They confine themselves
to the part of the town which is the most rocky and slightly elevated. In the winter
they get under this rock and go to sleep.”

Rattlesnakes are still common in the Milton Hills, near Boston, and at Hyde Park.

In confirmation of the occurrence of the Rattlesnake in Connecticut,
my friend, Mr. John H. Sage, sent me two specimens in 1893 from Port-
land. He wrote me at the same time that quite a number are killed in
this immediate vicinity (Portland) each season. As early as 1842
Thompson (Hist. Vermont, 1, p. 119) says that in Vermont they have
now nearly disappeared, but that formerly they were found in consid-
erable numbers, though mostly confined to a very few localities.

In the same year De Kay speaks of the Rattlesnake in the State of
New York (Zool. N. Y., 111, p. 57) as follows:

The Rattlesnake is common in various parts of the State, and in the Northern States
generally appears to prefer rocky situations. They abound in Clinton, Essex, and
Warren counties, along the shores of Lakes Champlain and George. Some idea
may be formed of their numbers in certain districts in this State by the following
extract from the Clairon newspaper, published in Warren County:

“Two men, in three days, killed 1,104 Rattlesnakes on the east side of Tongue Moun-
tain,in the town of Bolton. Some of the reptiles were very large, carrying from
15 to 20 rattles. They were killed for their oil, or grease, which is said to be very
valuable.”

Although numerous in the rocky, mountainous districts of this State, they are rare

or entirely wanting in those elevated regions which give rise to the Moose, the -

Raquet, and the Hudson rivers. They are found in the counties of Sullivan, Ulster,
Orange, and Greene. A few still linger in the swamps of Suffolk County.

This may be supplemented with the following statement from Prof.
Baird’s “Serpents of New York,” p. 10 (1854):

In New York it seems to be most abundant on the shores of Lake George and Lake
Champlain; especially in Rattlesnake Mountain of the former and Rattlesnake den
of the latter, a rocky bluff between Westport and Essex. It is a little remarkable
that the rattlesnake does not occur in the Adirondack regions of New York; at least,
an instance has never come to my knowledge. Such a region in Pennsylvania would
be infested by them.

As indicated in the last sentence it is still fairly common in the
Alleghany Mountains, from Pennsylvania southwards, though by no
means confined to the high altitude, as we have specimens from Wil-
mington, in North Carolina, Liberty County and Saint Simons Isle,
Georgia, while Dr. E. Coues quotes it as common in the vicinity of
Fort Macon, North Carolina, and certainly occurring on the islands
as well.

ee ee a ee

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 431

The Banded Rattlesnake probably does not enter the Florida penin-
sula proper, but the National Museum is indebted to Judge Bell for a
fine specimen from Gainesville, in the interior, at the base of the penin-
sula. It occurs also in all the other Southern States, and I have even
seen a specimen from Houma, in the pine lands southwest of New
Orleans.

In the mountains of Tennessee and Kentucky the Banded Rattlesnake
is still fairly common, but not so in Ohio and Indiana. Kirtland, as
early as 1838 (in Mather’s Sec. Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio, p. 167), stated that
in the former State it was then but rarely seen, though formerly very
abundant, and with regard to Indiana we have Dr. O. P. Hay’s recent
assertion (Batr. Rept. Indiana, 1893, p. 129) that it is to be found, in
all probability, in nearly all the counties of Indiana, though in most
places quite rare. He can only name two localities where it has been
_taken recently and record of it preserved, viz, New Harmony and
Monroe County. In Michiganit appears to be rare, the only definite
record I can lay hand on at present being that of Dr. Morris Gibbs
(Wolverine Naturalist, February, 1890, p. 12) of a specimen killed in
Kalamazoo County.

H. Garman (Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist., 111, 1892, p. 312) is author-
ity for the statement that it occurs throughout [linois in hilly, forest
regions, though being rapidly exterminated, while Higley (Trans. Wis.
Acad. Sc., vil, 1884, p. 161), in regard to its distribution in Wisconsin,
has only this to say, that it was formerly very common, but is now sel-
dom met, and that it may be found in the rocky bluffs of the larger
rivers.

Mr. Julius Hurter (Trans. St. Louis Acad. Se., v1, Dee. 1893, p.
258) has an interesting note on a local increase of this snake. Years
ago, he says, it was rather scarce in St. Clair County, IIL, as in those
days there was no stock law, and the pigs roamed around and exter-
minated a good many snakes, but since the stock law has gone into
effect, compelling swine to be penned up, the snakes have become more
numerous again. In early spring they are found near the bluffs under
rocks, but later on they go to the wheat fields and meadows, where
they are very saie till harvest time, when a good many are destroyed
by the farm hands.

West of the Mississippi they are still found in eastern Iowa, at least,
Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, and Indian Territory. The Banded Rat-
tlesnake even extends into Texas, as Dr. Shumard sent to the Smith-
sonian Institution a specimen collected on the upper Brazos during
Capt. Marcy’s exploration of that river.

Habits.—In a general way most of what has been written about the
habits of the rattlesnake refers to the present species. In contradis-
tinction to the Water Rattlesnake, C. adamanteus, and the Prairie Rat-
tlesnake, C. confluentus, the present species is often called the “Timber
Rattler,” because of its predilection for wooded districts. It does
undoubtedly often in summer take up its abode in prairies and mead-

432 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

ows, but it prefers rocky and mountainous places, where it can find
holes and crevices to hide itself, or sunny ledges, where it may enjoy
the heat of the day.

It has been repeatedly denied that the Rattlesnake climbs trees, and
it is certain enough that it does not do so habitually. It is but ill fitted
for climbing, yet there are unquestionable proofs that they do so ocea-
sionally. Of course, they do not climb up tall, smooth, perpendicular
trunks, but it is not more difficult for it to climb up a rough-barked
slanting tree with plenty of side branches than to wriggle up the rocks
of a mountain side.

The food of the Banded Rattlesnake consists in all sort of smaller
warm-blooded animals which may come its way, as rabbits, squirrels,
rats, mice, and an occasional bird. Holbrook pictures this species as
remarkably slow and sluggish, lying quietly in wait for his prey, and
never wantonly attacking nor destroying animals, except as food,
unless disturbed by them. A single touch, however, will effect this;
even rattling the leaves in his neighborhood is sufficient to irritate him.
On such occasions he immediately coils himself, shakes his rattles vio-
lently in sign of rage, and strikes at whatever is placed within his
reach. In his native woods, Holbrook continues, one may pass within
a few feet of him unmolested. Though aware of the passenger’s pres-
ence, he either lies quiet or glides away to a more retired spot. He
never follows the object of his rage, whether an animal that has unwa-
rily approached so near as to touch him, or only a stick thrust at him to
provoke his anger, but strikes on the spot, and prepares to repeat the
blow, or he may slowly retreat lke an unconquered enemy, sure of his
strength, but not choosing further combat.

Compared with the Diamond-backed Rattlesnake, the Banded Rattler
is the more timid and less aggressive. Speaking of these animals one
does not quite feel like characterizing any of them as *“ gentle,” yet this
iS an expression used by many a one who has had plenty of experience
with them. The late Gen. Kirby Smith once told me of an incident
which illustrates the amount of provocation a Rattlesnake will pass
unnoticed under certain circumstances. Gen. Smith’s home in Ten-
nessee was located on a high plateau, and a narrow path led from the
house to the small railway station in the valley below. One day a
party of ladies went down the path in Indian file, the general in the
lead, and the rear being brought up by a barefooted lad carrying a
valise. Suddenly the latter shouted. A Rattlesnake was lying coiled
in the path, and he had just discovered it in stepping over it without
touching it. By the merest chance they had all avoided stepping upon
it, though it seemed almost impossible that the ladies’ dresses should
not have touched it. Gen. Smith said he felt lke sparing the snake’s
life. In captivity a Banded Rattlesnake may be handled with impunity
by a self-possessed man, if he moves quietly and deliberately, not
frighteiiing it by any sudden and unexpected movements. There even
seems to be truth in some of the stories. about children having been

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 433

found playing witb and carrying about live Rattlesnakes without
having been hurt.* °

It is somewhat curious: that the breeding habits of this species are
still almost unknown. At least, very little definite information is on
record. The time of pairing is difficult to ascertain. The number of
young born at one birth appears to be about nine. The largest of a
number of embryos preserved by Prof. 8S. F. Baird (U.S. Nat. Mus.,
No. 1292) and apparently ready to be born is about 245 mm. (94 inches)
long, with a diameter of 12 mm. (one-half inch).

THE DIAMOND RATTLESNAKE,

Crotalus adamanteus, Beauvois.
Plate 10.

1799.—Crolatus adamanteus, t BEAUvo1s, Trans. Am. Philos. Soc. Iv, p. 368.—Say,
Sillim. Am. Journ. Sc., I, 1819, p. 263.— HOLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., led.,
11, p. 77 (1838).—HoLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., 2 ed., 111, p. 17 (1842).—
Der Kay, Zool. New York, 111, p. 57 (1842).—BairD and GIRARD, Cat. N.
Am. Serp., p. 3 (1853).— Lz Contre, South. Med. Surg. Journ., rx, 1853 (p.
664).—BaIrRD, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Reptiles, p. 14, pl. xx1v, fig. 2 (1859) .—
JAN, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1859, extr. p. 28.—JAN, Elenc. Sist. Ofid., p. 123
(1863).—Corg, in Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 534 (1875).—Copx,
Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 1867 (p. 64).—Copr, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. xiv,
1891, p. 689 (1892).—TRUE, in Hammond’s South Carolina, p. 235 (1883).—
GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid., pp. 112, 171 (1883).—Garman,
Bull. Essex. Inst., xrx, 1887, p. 122.—YarRROw, in Buck’s Ref. Handb,
Med. Sce., vi, p. 166 (1888).—JorDAN, Man. Vert. North. U. S., 5 ed., p.
199 (1888).—BARRINGER, Ven. Rept. U. S., p. 4 (1891).—WILLIAMs,
Science, xx, Dec. 16, 1892, p. 345.—La:NNBERG, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus.,xvil,
1894, p. 335.—H. GARMAN, Bull. Essex. Inst., xxvi, 1894, p. 36.—Cau-
disona adamantea, COPE, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven, Rattlesn., p. 121 (1861).—
Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 309.

1802.—Crotalus rhombifer, LATREILLE, Hist. Nat. Rept., 111, p. 197.—DauDIN, Hist.
Nat, Rept., v, p. 323 (1803).—DUMERIL et BiBron, Erpét. Génér., v1,
p. 1470 (1854).—DuGis, Naturaleza, rv, 1879 (p. 22).

1802.—-Crotalus horridus, LATREILLE, Hist. Nat. Rept., m1, p.199 (but not p. 186;
nor of Linn. 1758).—HARLAN, Journ. Phila. Acad., v, 1827, p.370.—Har-
LAN, Med. Phys. Res. (p.133) (1835).

1802.—Crotalus durissus, Suaw, Gen. Zodl., 111, p. 333 (not of Linn. 1758).

1853.— Crotalus terrificus, LE CONTE, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1853 (p. 419) (not of Laur.
1768).—Copre, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 337.

1875.—Crotalus adamanteus, subsp. adamanteus, COPE, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. No. 1,
Check-list, pp. 33, 79.—Copr, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., x1, 1888, p.393.—
Core, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891, p. 690 (1892).— Yarrow, Bull. U.S
Nat. Mus. No. 24, pp. 12, 75 (1883).

Figures.—BEAUVOIS, Trans. Am. Philos. Soc., Iv, pl. facing p. 380, upper figure
(1799).—SHaAw, Gen. Zool., 111, pl. LXXx1x (1802).—DAUDIN, Hist. Nat. Rept. v
pl. Lx, figs. 22, 23; pl. Lx1x, fig. 2 (1803). HoLsrook, N. Am. Herpet.,1 ed.,
II, pl. xvi (1888); 2 ed., 111, pl. 1 (1842).—DumrriIL et BIBRON, Erpét. Gen.,
Atlas, pl. LXxxIv, fig. 3 (1854).—Bairp, Pac. R. R. Fer" x, Reptiles, pl. xxiv,
fig. 2 (1859).—Jan, Icon. Ophid., livr. 46, pl. 11, fig. 2 (but not fig. 1) (1874).—
YARROW, in Buck’s Ref. Handb. Med. Sce., v1, pl. XX Vi (1888).

* See Forest and Stream, xxxvu, Aug. 6, 1891, p. 44,
t From the Latin adamanteus, ieamnoad: shaped; lozenge- -shaped.

H. Mis. 184, pt. 228

434 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1892.

Description.*—Head triangular. Two anterior frontals (internasals),
connected with superciliaries (supraoculars) on each side by two large
plates; inside of these a second row; ineluded space filled by small
scales. Scales margining superciliaries (supraoculars) small; scat-
tered larger ones toward the center of the intermediate space. Three
rows of scales between the suborbitalsand labials. Suborbitals extend-
ing to the middle of the orbit. Labials 15 or 16 above; first, fifth, and
seventh largest, and vertical; below, 18; first, fourth, and fifth largest.
Dorsal rows, 27; outer rows obsoletely carinated. Three or 4 dark
rings on tail. Three series of well-defined perfect rhombs, 1 dorsal, 2
lateral, separated by narrow lines. Light stripe from superciliary to
the angle of the mouth.

Seales on the cheek smooth. Three rather large plates on the edge
of the upper part of the head, between the superciliaries (supraoculars)
and rostral,inside of which is a second row of 3, also larger than the
rest.

The two lower rows of lateral scales smooth. Third and fourth very
faintly carinated. Scales on the back and sides not conspicuously dif-
ferent in size except the lower two or threerows. Posteriorly, near the
tail, all the scales are carinated except the lowest.

General color, yellowish gray, with rhomboidal black blotches, lighter
in the center, and with all the angles perfect. Or rather there is a
series of dull yellowish nes crossing obliquely from one side of the
abdomen to the other over the back, following the oblique series of
scales, and occupying generally the posterior half of each scale, the
basal portion being black. These lines, of which there are about 36
crossing from each side, from head to tail (9 on tail), decussate first on
the fifth or sixth lateral row, and then on the back, where they are
more or less confluent three or four rows. The rhomboids thus inclosed
and crossing the back are generally black for 15 or 2 scales within the
yellowish brown, mottled with darker. The intervals on the sides
between the lines are mostly dark yellowish brown, minutely mottled
with dark brown. These intervals constitute a lateral series of trans-
verse rhomboids, sometimes with the lower angle truncated. Opposite
to the dorsal rhomboids is a series of small triangles in the angles of
the first decussation. The distance between two parallel transverse
stripes generally consists of five rows of scales, occasionally of six.

On the sides and posteriorly these markings are more or less indis-
tinct, though generally recognizable. The tail usually exhibits a good
deal of black. The under parts are dull yellowish white, or greenish
white, clouded toward the sides with brown; no regular. spots visible.
The biack on the tail does not constitute complete rings, but is inter-
rupted in the middle of the lower surface, and in fact the black patches
alternate with each other, and are not opposite.

* By S. F. Baird, in Baird and Girard’s, N. Am. Serp., p. 3, from a South Carolina
specimen, U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 250.

;
I ee

PLATE 10.

Stejneger.

Report of National Museum, 1893

‘TIMESN] [BUOBN "SQ oY} UL 4SBO B UUIOA YT
“SNALNVWVGYV SNIVLOUD-—‘SNVNSSTLLVY GNOWVIG

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 435

The top of heaa is light brown, with occasional black scales. A dull
yellowish streak starts at the posterior edge of the superciliary plate,
and passing obliquely backward, through two rows of scales, extends
to angle of the mouth (fig. 58), A second band starts on the plate in-
‘advance of the superciliary, and crossing the anterior orbitals, expands
till it involves the seventh, eighth, and ninth upper labials. Interval
between the first two stripes dark brown. There are also indications
of a second vertical light bar in front of the nostril, and two below the
pit. Rostral dark yellowish, lighter in the margin.

Number of ventrals (gastrosteges), 169; of subcaudals (urosteges),
32; scale rows across body, 27.

Variation.— With the exception of the usual variation of the anal
color through the various tinges of grayish and brownish, the color
and pattern of this species is unusually constant. The characteristic
whitish stripes on rostral, nasals, and on the sides of the head are
well marked, even in the largest specimens, and the dorsal pattern is
also nearly always very distinct.

Geographical distribution—The diamond rattler inhabits a compara-
tively small area in the southeastern corner of our country. Florida
seems to be the center of its distribution, and from that State it extends
along the coast northward into the southern portion of North Carolina
at about the thirty-fifth parallel, Mr. H. H. Brimley having in letter
advised me of a specimen, presumably of this species, having been
taken in 1885 at the Neuse River, across from New Berne. Along the
gulf coast it extends at least as far west as the Mississippi River, being
still found not far from New Orleans, as Dr. Gustave Kohn informs me,
although very scarce. It also ascends the Mississippi River some dis-
tance, exactly how far I do not know, but a specimen is in the National
Museum (No. 4393) which is said to have been collected by Col. Kear-
ney in Arkansas.

In Florida the species is found everywhere, including the Keys.

Habits.—The Diamond Rattler, or Diamond-backed Rattlesnake, is
usually called the Water Rattler in localities where the Banded Rattle-
snake also occurs in order to distinguish it from the latter, which is
then known as the Timber-Rattler. As the name indicates, this species
is rather partial to the neighborhood of water, although it is not a
water snake to the extent of pursuing its prey into the water. Yet it
is said to be a good swimmer and not even afraid to cross over from
Key to Key (Lennberg, I. ¢.).

Although rather common, and probably the Rattlesnake most fre-
quently seen in captivity, at least in this country, but little detailed and
reliable information concerning its habits can be found in the litera-
ture. The observers who have had anything to say about it are
often much at variance. Some regard it as very slow and clumsy, others
again insist that it is much more active than the Banded Rattlesnake
and much fiercer. Some report their inability to iiduce this species

436 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

to eat in confinement, while others again claim that it takes food with-
out trouble. Equally defective is our knowledge in regard to its
breeding habits.

The Diamond Rattler is our largest species, and in fact one of the
largest of the whole family. The largest specimen in the National
Museum collection (No. 10947) is only 6 feet 54 inches long, but much
larger specimens are on record. Dr. C. 8. Allen has recorded 1 speci-
men 8 feet 5 inches, with a circumference of 15 inches, which was shot
near Oak Lodge, Fla., by Chas. F. Latham, in November, 1890, while
Mr. Frank M. Chapman mentions one 8 feet 9 inches long, and killed
by J. H. Norton, of Jacksonville.*

We often enough hear of Florida Rattlers 9 feet or more long, but in
all cases I have investigated it was found that the measurements were
taken from skins, or mounted specimens, which of course may be
stretched almost to any desired length.

With a supply of venom proportionate to its size the dangerous
nature of a stroke of one of these large brutes, if well delivered, may
wellbe imagined. Nevertheless, fatalities are comparatively rare, and
even cases of bites are not heard of nearly as often as one might be
led to suppose from the number of specimens which are still found in
many places.

THE TEXAS RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus atrox,t Baird and Girard.
Plate 11.

1853.— Crotalus atrox, BAIRD and GIRARD, N. Am. Serp., pp. 5, 156.—DuMERIL et
BrBRON, Erpét, Génér., vil, ii, p. 1482 (1854).—HALLOWELL, Proc. Phila.
Acad., 1856, p. 307.—BairpD, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Whipple’s Route, p. 39
(1859).—Barrp, Mex. Bound. Sury. u, Rept. p. 14 (1859).—Copr, Proc.
Phila. Acad., 1859, p.337.—Copr, in Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100 Mer., v,
p. 534 (1875).—Coorer, Proc. Calif. Acad. Nat. Sce., Iv, p. 66 (1870).—
Caudisona atrox, Cork, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn. (p. 121) (1861).—
Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad. 1866, p. 309.

1859.—Crotalus adamanteus, var. atroxz, JAN, Rev. Mag. Zool., 1859, Extr. p. 28.—
JAN, Elene. Sist. Ofid., p. 123 (1863).—Cope, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus. No.
1, p. 33 (1875).—Corr, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus. No. 17, p. 24 (1880).—Copr,
Proc. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., x1, 1888, p. 398.—Copz, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus.,
XIv, 1891, p. 690 (1892).—Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1892, p..336.—YaR-
row, Bull. U. 8S. Nat. Mus. No. 24, pp. 12, 76 (1883).—GAaRMAN, Rept.
Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid., pp. 113, 172 (1883).—Caudisona adamantea atrox,
CovugEs, in Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 607 (1875).

1861.—Caudisona atrox, var. sonoraensis, KENNICOTT, Proc, Phila. Acad., X11, 1861,
p. 206.—Corr, Proc. Phila, Acad., x11, 1861, p. 292.

1861.—Caudisona scutulata, KeENNIcOTT, Proc. Phila. Acad., x1m, 1861, p. 207.—
Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 309.—Crotalus scutulatus Cop, in
Wheeler’s Surv. W.100 Mer., v, p.533 (1875).

1863.—Crotalus adamanteus, var. sonoriensis, JAN, Elene. Sist. Ofid., p. 124.

*Abstr. Proc. Linn. Soc. New York, year end. Mch. 2, 1892, p. 4.
t From the Latin atrox, terrible, cruel.

Report of National Museum, 1893,—Stejneger,

TEXAS RATTLESNAKE,—CROTALUS ATROX.
From Baird, Rep. Mex. Bound. Surv.

PLATE

Wile

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 437

1874.—Crotalus adamanteus, JAN, Icon. Ophid., livr. 46, pl.u, fig. 1 (not of
Beauvois).
1875.—Crotalus adamanteus, var. scutulatus, Copr, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 1,
p. 33.—Coper, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus. xiv, 1891, p. 690 (1892).—Caudisona
adamantea scutulata, COUES, in Wheeler’s Sury. W. 100 Mer,, v, p. 607.
Figures.—Batrp, Mex. Bound. Sury., i, Rept., pl. 1 (1859).—Barrp, Pac. R. R.
Rep., x, Rept., pl. XxIv, fig. 3 (1859).—JAN, Icon. Ophid., livr. 46, pl. 11, fig. 1
(1874).

Description.*—Head subtriangular; plates on head; 2 anterior fron-
tals (internasals) in contact; between these and superciliaries (supra-
oculars), on side of the crown, 2 imbricated plates; space inclosed occu-
pied by smaller scales; superciliaries (Supraoculars) bordered by a row
of larger scales; the anterior much largest. Three rows of scales
between labials and suborbitals; labials 16 above, first, fifth, and sev-
enth, largest; 15 below, first and third largest; dorsal rows 25-27; 2
exterior rows smooth; on the tail 3-6 halfrings. Color yellowish brown,
with a continuous succession of dorsal lozenges, sometimes truncate
before and behind; intervals allnarrow. A single transverse light line;
superciliary stripe from superciliary directly to the angle of the mouth.

General style of coloration somewhat as in C. adamanteus. Ground
color above, dull yellowish brown, with a series of subhexagonal
patches from the head nearly to the tail, in an uninterrupted series,
separated throughout by narrow lines. We may refer the markings to
the intersection of two series of light yellowish lines, about 40 in
number, crossing obliquely from each side across to the other, along
the anterior half of as many oblique series of scales. The lateral.
decussation is along the sixth row of dorsal scales; on the back, where
they cross, the lines are confluent for a breadth of 5 or 6 scales, mak-
ing a series of transverse lines across the back, truncating the obtuse
angles of the rhomboids, which would otherwise be produced. Some-
times the acute lateral angles. of the rhomboids are also truncated.
Laterally, the yellowish lines are more or less obsolete, leaving a more

or less distinct chain pattern. The rhomboids or subrhomboids
inclosed have a narrow margin of dark brown, lighter toward the
center. In all cases the interval between the successive rhomboids is
but 1 or 2 half scales in width. The lateral rhomboids and triangles
referred to in C. adamanteus are indicated by two alternating series of
dark brown blotches, the first along the third and fourth lateral row,
opposite the apices ef the rhomboids; the second along the sixth and
seventh, and alternating with the same; the spots occupy 1 seale, or
part of 4 contiguous ones. Space between these rhomboids and the
yellowish lines, dull yellowish brown. Beueath nearly uniform yellow-
ish, slightly clouded on the sides of the scales. On the tail the
blotches are confiuent inte 3 or 6 dark brown half rings, interrupted
on the surface. General distribution of lines on the head much as in

* Original description by S. F. Baird,in Baird and Girard, N. Am. Serp., p.5, from
the type specimens from Texas.

438 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

C. adamanteus ; a narrow light line from the posterior end of supercil-
iary backward directly to the angle of the mouth; a second from the
anterior extremity, nearly parallel with the first, the two inclosing an
indistinct patch and separated on the labials by 44 scales. There is
also a single narrow light line across the superciliary perpendicular
to its length, obsolete in old specimens.

It may-readily be distinguished from C. adamanteus by its light color
and the truncations of the rhomboids, as well as the general obsolete-
ness of the lateral markings. The rhomboids are longer in proportion
and more rounded. The 2 lateral rows of scales are smooth, the next
2 more strongly carinated than in C. adamanteus. The fifth upper
labial is largest, and transverse, the rest nearly uniform. The stripes
on the side of the head are less distinct. .

From C. confluentus it may be distinguished by the greater compara-
tive size of the interval between the dorsal blotches, especially poste-
riorly. In C. confluentus there are two light lines across the supercil-
iary plate, dividing it into three sections, the central rather narrower.

Here, too, the posterior facial stripe, instead of passing to the angle of
the mouth, goes back of it on the second row above the labials, in C.
atrox, passing directly to the angle of the mouth. Other important
distinctions are seen in the narrower scales of C. confluentus, ete.

From C. lucifer, the more narrow head, fewer and larger intersuper-
ciliary seales, lighter color, arrangement of color along the head, will
at once distinguish it.

Number of ventrals (gastrosteges), 177 to 187; number of subcaudals
(urosteges), 23 to 28; number of scale rows across the body, 25 to 27.

Variation—This species exhibits a considerable variation in the
scutellation, less so in coloration. The ground color is usually more or
less grayish, with a varying amount of brownish, olive, or yellowish
admixture, while on the Pacific coast there seems to be a reddish form,
geographically limited, which will be considered separately as a race.
The head pattern is fairly constant and will at once serve to distinguish
this species from C. adamanteus, the nasals and anterior labials being
unicolor, densely dusted over with minute black dots.

As for the scutellation, the greatest variation is shown in the pres-
ence, or absence, of an upper loreal, as well as in the size of the scales
or scutes covering the upper surface of the snout. In a number of
specimens the upper head scales are more or less enlarged, in some
forming on the snout a series of paired scutes reaching to between the
orbits, very much after fashion of C. molossus and its nearest allies.
This character, however, is shared by specimens belonging to other
species, for instance C. horridus, and notably in C. confluentus, so much
so, in fact, that the so-called CO. seutulatus, which is based upon such
specimens, is composed of specimens of both species. The character
is mostly exhibited in specimens from the Mexican tableland and its
extension into Arizona, but it is apparently not constant enough to

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 439

warrant us in recognizing it aS a geographic subspecies even. The
character is an ancestral one, and its appearance may probably be
attributed to reversion.

Geographical distribution.— Crotalus atrox covers a considerable area,
embracing the arid portion of Texas, parts of southern New Mexico,
Arizona, and California, southward into Mexico. In western and
southern Texas, west of about the ninety-seventh meridian this species
appear to be the Rattlesnake, being apparently common in all suitable
localities. It does not appear to occur in the moist region of eastern
Texas, and as a matter of fact we do not know which form occupies
that region at all, whether C. adamanteus extends so far west as to
meet its western representative, C. atrox, or whether there is an actual
gap between the two species, occupied by neither. Toward the north,
Prof. Cope (Proc. Phila. Acad., 1892, p. 336), has found it at the eastern
foot of the Staked Plain, about the head of the Colorado River, but he
did not meet with it on the Plain itself, nor north of the region men-
tioned. That it extends considerably farther north is proven, however,
by a specimen (No. 4225) in the National Museum, collected near the
western boundary of Texas, just south of the Canadian River and at
the northern foot of the Llano Estacado.

Habits.—Very little has been written concerning the habits of C.
atrox, but in a general way they may be considered to be similar to
those of C. adamanteus, except that the former is apparently less
partial to water. Being a large and powerful snake, though not quite
so large as the Diamond Rattlesnake, it is capable of inflicting very
dangerous bites. ;

THE RED DIAMOND RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus atrox ruber,* Cope.
1892.—Crotalus adamanteus ruber, COPE, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., x1v, 1891, p. 690.

Description.t—Rostral plate a little wider than high; plates of upper
side of canthers rostralis smaller than in other subspecies, the posterior
especially smaller than the anterior, and partly decurved laterally.
One loreal. Five rows of scales between orbit and labial; eight rows
between superciliary plates. Second pair of inferior labials with the
marginal portion cut off from the postsymphyseal portion. (Perhaps
an abnormality.)

The color is light red, marked above with deep red spots. These are
of a longitudinal oval form anteriorly, but posteriorly they have a
diamond-shaped form. They have no distinct lateral borders, either
light or dark, but they are separated on the median line of the back by
a single row of yellow-tipped scales. Traces of brownish red indefinite

*From the Latin ruber, red, ruddy. .
t Original description by E. D. Cope, in Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891, p. 690,
from U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 9209; locality unknown.

440 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

spots opposite their lateral angles as well as their intervals. Head
without marking, except a faint trace of a pale line from the eye to the
border of the mouth below it. Inferior surfaces yellow. Tail white,
with five black cross bands, of which all but the first are complete rings.

Gastrosteges (ventrals), 186; urosteges (subcaudals), 26; scale rows,
27; total length, 1.245mm.

Variation.—The characters upon which this form were originally
based, viz, the small size of the scales on canthus rostralis and the
absence of either light or dark borders to the dorsal rhombs do not
seem to hold in a larger series, for of the additional specimens which I
have seen some have the canthal scales of normal size, while in nearly
all the specimens there are traces at least of the borders to the dorsal
spots, these borders becoming apparently less distinct as the snakes
grow larger. The only character which seems to fairly distinguish this
form as a subspecies is the bright cinnamon red color of its upper sur-
face, at least in the large specimens.

Geographical distribution.—This subspecies was originally described
from a specimen the habitat of which was not known. Since then I
have seen, thanks to Dr. C. Hart Merriam, several large specimens from
Twin Oaks, San Diego County, on the Pacific slope of the coast ranges,
which fixes the range of the form. A young specimen in the National
Museum (No. 8856), somewhat darker and less bright red than the
others, probably either on account of its age or the long time it has
been in aleohol, is recorded as collected by A. W. Chase at San Fran-
cisco, November, 1875, but it is probably very doubtful if the specimen
really came from the immediate vicinity of that city.

Habits.—Nothing special is known of the life history of this form.

THE PRAIRIE RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus confluentus,* Say.
Plate 12.

1818.—?Crotalinus viridis, RAFINESQUE, Am. Month. Mag., Iv, 1818, p. 41.

1823.—Crotalus confluentus, SAY, in Long’s Exped. Rocky Mts., 11, p. 48.—BatRD
and Grrarb, N. Am. Serp., p.8 (1853).—BarrpD and GIRARD, in Marey’s
Expl. Red River, p. 214, Zool., pl. 1 (1853).—HALLOWELL, Proc. Phila.
Acad., 1856, p. 250.—Barrp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Whipple’s Route, p. 40
(1859).—Barrp, Mex. Bound. Surv., u, Rept., p. 14 (1859).—CoopEr, Pae.
R. R., Rep., Xu, pt. U1, p. 295 (1860).—Coorer, Amer. Natural, 1869, p.
124.—Coprr, Proc. Phil. Acad., 1859, p. 337 (1860).—Corkr, Bull. U.S. Nat.
Mus., No. 1, p. 33 (1875).—Coprr, Amer. Natural., x11, 1879, p. 4385.—CopE,
Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 17, p. 24 (1880).—YARrRow, in Wheeler’s Sury. W.
100 Mer., v, p.530 (part) (1875).—Covrs and Yarrow, Bull. Geol. Surv.
Terr. (Hayden’s), Iv, No. 1, Feb., 1878, p. 262.—Craain, Trans. Kansas
Acad, Se., vu, p. 121 (1881).—GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am. Ophid., pp. 114,
172 (1883).—GARMAN, List N. Am. Rept. Batr., p. 34 (1884).—STEJNEGER,

*From the Latin confluens, flowing together; with reference to the spots on the
neck of the type specimen running together into a longitudinal mark.

Report of Nationa) Museum, 1893.— Stejneger. PLATE 12.

PRAIRIE RATTLESNAKE,—CROTALUS CONFLUENTUS.
From Baird, Pacific R. R. Rep

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 441

N. Amer. Fauna, No.5, p. 111 (1891).—Taytor, Ann. Rep. Nebraska State
Board Agric., 1891, p. 354 (1892).—Hay, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xv, 1892, p.
387.—CouEs, Hist. Exp. Lewis and Clark, 1, p. 313; 11, p. 373 (1893).—
Caudisona confluenta Corr, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn., p. 122
(1861).—Copn, Proce. Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 309.—ALLEN, Proc. Boston Soe.
N. H., X vil, 1874, p. 69, extr. p. 39.—COUEs, in Wheeler’s Surv. West 100
Mer., V, p. 604 (1875).
1852.—Crotalus lecontei, HALLOWELL, Proc. Phila. Acad., v1, 1852, p. 180.—HaAL-
LOWELL, in Sitgreave’s Exp. Zuni and Colo. Riv., p. 139 (in part only)
(1854).—Caudisona lecontei, COPE, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn. (p. 121)
(1861).—HAYDEN, Geol. Nat. Hist. Upp. Missouri, p. 177 (1862).
859.—Crotalus adumanteus, var. confluentus, JAN, Rev. et Mag. Zool., 1859, No. 12,
extr. p. 28.—J AN, Elene. Sist. Ofid., p. 124 (1863).
1865.—Crotalus durissus, MAX VON WtkeED, Verz. Rept. Reise Nord. Amer., p. 65,
pl. vu, figs. 1-3 (not of LINN.).
1866.—Caudisona confluenta, var. lecontei, COPE, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 307 (not
of 1883).
1875.—Crotalus adamanteus, subsp. atrox, YARROW, in Wheeler’s Sury. West 100
Mer., Vv, p.529 (not of B. & G.).
1875.—Crotalus lucifer, YARROW, in Wheeler’s Surv. West 100 Mer., v, p.529 (not
of B. & G.).
1875.—?Caudisona lucifer, var. cerberus, COUES, in Wheeler’s Sury. West 100 Mer.,
v, p. 607.
*1883.—Crotalus confluentus, var. confluentus, COPE, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1883, p. 11.—
Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1892, p. 336.—Corr, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
XIV, 1891, p. 692 (1892).—Taytor, Amer. Natural., xxv1, Sept. 1892, p. 752,
1883.—Crotalus confluentus, var. pulverulentus, Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1883,
p. 11.—Crotalus confluentus pulverulentus, COPE, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., XIv,
1891, p. 692 (1892).
Figures.—BairD and GIRARD, in Marcy’s Expl. Red River, Zool., pl. t (1854).—
CoopER, Pac. R. R. Rep., xu, pt. iii, pl. x1 (1859).—DuMériL et BIBRON,
Erpét. Génér., Atlas, pl. LXXxIv bis, fig. 4 (1854).

Description.*—Head subtriangular. Plates on top of head squami-
form, irregular, angulated, and imbricated; scales between supercili-
aries (Supraoculars) small, numerous, uniform. Four rows of scales
between the suborbital series (which only extends to the center of the
orbit) and the labials. Labials 15 or 18, nearly uniform. Dorsal series
27-29. Dorsal blotches quadrate, concave before and behind; intervals

qd ?
greater behind. Spots transversely quadrate posteriorly, ultimately
becoming 10 or 12 half rings. Two transverse lines on superciliaries,
inclosing about one-third. Stripe from superciliary to angle of jaws
crosses angle of the mouth on the second row above labial. Rostral
margined with lighter.

This species bears a considerable resemblance to C. atrox, but the
body is more slender and compact. Scales on the top of the head
anterior to the superciliaties nearly uniform in size. Line of scales
across from one nostril to the other consists of 6, not 4 as in C. atrox.
Superciliaries more prominent. Labial series much smaller. Upper
anterior orbitals (preoculars) much smaller, as also is the anterior nasal.

*From 8. F. Baird’s description of specimens from Wichita Mts. and Texas, in

Baird and Girard’s N. Am. Serp., p. 8.

442 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Scales on the top of the head less carinated. Scales between super-
ciliaries smaller and more numerous, 5 or 6in number instead of 4.
Two lateral rows of scales smooth, first, second, and third gradually
increasing in size. Scales more linear than in C. atroz.

General color yellowish brown with a series of subquadrate dark
blotches, with the corners rounded and the anterior and posterior sides
frequently concave, the exterior convex (fig. 53). These blotches are 10
or 11 scales wide and 4or 5 long, lighter in the center, and margined for
one-third of a scale with light yellowish. The intervals along the back
light brown, darker than the margins of the blotches. Anteriorly the
interval between the dark spots is but a single scale; posteriorly it is
more, becoming sometimes 2 scales, where also the spots are more
rhomboidal or lozenge-shaped; nearer the tail, however, they become
transversely quadrate. The fundamental theory of coloration might
be likened to that of Crotalus adamanteus, viz, of 40 or 50 light lines
decussating each other from opposite sides; but the angles of decus-
sating, instead of being acute, are obtuse, and truncated or rounded off
throughout. Along the third, fourth, and fifth lateral rows of scales
is a series of indistinct brown blotches covering a space of about 4
scales and falling opposite to the dorsal blotches; between these
blotches, and opposite to the intervals of the dorsal blotches, are others
less distinct. Along the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth rows is a
second series of obsolete blotches, each covering a space of about 4
scales, and just opposite the intervals between the dorsal spots. The
dorsal and lower series ate separated by an interval of 3 scales, this
interval light brown. Beneath the color is dull yellowish, and 10 or 12
darker half rings are visible on the tail.

In point of coloration the principal features, as compared with C.
atrox, lie in the dorsal blotches, being disposed in subquadrate spots
instead of subrhomboids; the intervals thus forming bands across the
back perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. This tendency to assume
the subquadrangular pattern has broken up the chainwork into isolated
portions, as in Coluber eximius or Crotalophorus tergeminus (Sistrurus
catenatus). The intervals of the dorsal blotches are wide and darker in
the middle, while in C. atrox they are narrow, not linear, and unicolor.
The sides of the head (fig. 59) present the usual light stripe from the
posterior extremity of the superciliary; it passes, however, to the angle
of the jaw on the neck, along the second row of scales above the labials.
A second stripe passes in front of the eye to the labials, widening there.

A small, light vertical bar is seen below the pit and another on the:

outer edge of the rostral. On the superciliaries are seen two light trans-
verse lines inclosing a space nearly one-third of the whole surface. In
C. atrox there is a single median line. Sometimes, asin C. atrox, the
single bletches on the nape are replaced by two elongated ones parallel
to each other.

.
|

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 443

Variation.—There is some slight variation in the size of the scales
covering the top of the head, which is, in a general way, correlated with
the latitude of the locality, but the character is so exceedingly unstable
and apparently unsupported by any other character that it would be
unprofitable and misleading to adopt any subspecies at the present
stage of our knowledge, at least. This instability in the size of the
head scales sometimes goes so far as to fuse them into nearly regular
shields on the snout and between the eyes, exactly in the same manner
as in certain specimens of Crotalus atroxr, which have been called Cro-
talus scutulatus, the result being that this so called species or subspecies
is a mixture of atrox and confluentus. Such scutulated specimens have
been found both in Arizona and in Montana, the two extremes of its
geographical distribution. A specimen from Fort Hayes is recorded by
Garman as having the outer edge of the supraocular produced into a
horn, as in C. cerastes.

The color varies also greatly being sometimes duller, sometimes
brighter, lighter or darker, depending upon age, season, condition of
skin, climate, and the predominating color of the surroundings, but I
have seen no differences of such a character or stability as to render
the recognition of geographical races possible or profitable.

Geographicai distribution.—Broadly speaking, the Prairie Rattlesnake
occupies the area bounded in the East by the ninety-sixth meridian and
the Upper Missouri Valley; by the main divide of the Rocky Moun-
tains. in the West; by the thirty-third parallel in Texas and the Mexi-
can boundary further west in the South; and by the fiftieth parallel in
the North. In the Northeast its distribution appears to be limited by
the watershed between Missouri and the Red River of the North,
according to Dr. Coues (Bull. Geol. Surv. Terr. Iv, 1878, p. 267), who
cellected numerous specimens along the Canadian border between this
watershed and the crest of the Rockies. He also states that itis to be
considered fairly common in the region of the Upper Missouri and Milk
River and some of their northern tributaries; its range thus extending
some distance into the British Possessions, where Mr. James M.
Macoun informs me that it is most abundant from Medicine Hat, on the
Saskatchewan, to the boundary. Inthe region just south of the above,
Dr. J. A. Allen, while attached to the Union Pacific Railroad expeili-
tion, found itcommon, especially in the bad lands of the Little Missouri
and along the Yellowstone, outnumbering all the other ophidians
together, and on the expedition of 1872 not less than 2,000 were killed
(Proce. Boston Soe. Nat. Hist., xvi1, 1874, p. 69). In Nebraska, Taylor
(Amer. Natural., xxv1, Sept. 1892, p. 752) observes that it was formerly
abundant all over the State, but that it is now confined almost wholly
to the middle and western part, where it is by no means rare. The dis-
tribution in Kansas, Oklahoma, and Indian Territory is very similar,
while in northwestern Texas it is recorded from between the main

444 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

forks of the Brazos River and on the Llano Estacado as far south as
Canon Blanco (Cope, Zool. Pos..Texas, p. 24; Proc. Phila. Acad. 1892,
p. 336). Further west Capt. Pope collected specimens at the Pecos
tiver near the thirty-second parallel. As we leave the plains in going
west we find this species ascend higher into the mountains, as itis not
uncommon in New Mexico and Arizona and Colorado above 5,000 feet
altitude. Even in Montana and Idaho it reaches this elevation, at least
in places, though it probably does not occur much higher. Although
the maim divide of the Rocky Mountains in this northern region seems
to be the limit of its extension to the west, yet in at least one place
where there is no high crest to obstruct its passage across, has it been
found on the western slope, viz; at Lemhi, Idaho, in which locality it
was collected by parties of Dr. Merriam’s Idaho exploration party, as
recorded by me in North American Fauna, No. 5, p. 111 (1891).

Habits—The Prairie Rattlesnake being one of the smaller species,
as it seldom reaches a length of over 4 feet with a proportionately
slender body, does not seem to be a very dangerous snake. Dr. Allen,
as referred to above, found it so common in the region visited by the
expedition that several hundred were killed by the different members,
yet the only casualty resulting from it was one horse bitten. On the
expedition of 1872 not less than two thousand were killed and not a
man nor av animal was bitten. Allen also comments upon the fact that
they were found abroad quite late in the season, as they were met with
quite frequently after several severe frosts had occurred. During July
two pairs were found in coitu, indicating the season ‘at which they pair.
Dr. O. P. Hay (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xv, 1892, p. 387), on the other
hand, quotes Prof. S. W. Williston as conan that the sexes pairin May.

Taylor (1. ¢.) found its food habits similar to those of the Massasauga.
It is the species often found in or around the homes of the prairie
dogs, where they are most abundantly found during the breeding
season of the dos.

Professor Cope records a similar observation (Proc. Phila. Acad.,

1892, p. 336) and remarks that the snake protects itself by retreating
ually into the holes of the prairie dogs. The popular belief that
these rodents and the rattlesnakes live together because of any special
friendship is certainly erroneous, as there can be no doubt that the
latter to a great extent feed upon the offspring of the former.

In addition to the hibernation, which, according to Dr. Coues, lasts
about six months, terminating with the loosening of the ground fro1a
frost, Dr. Suckley (Pac. R. R. Rep., x11, Pt. iii, p. 296) observed these
shakes m a more or less sluggish and stupid condition during the
drought of summer, a condition which he calls “ wstivation.”

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 445

Tue Paciric RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus lucifer,* Baird and Girard
Plate 13.

1842.—? Crotalus oregonus, HOLBROOK, N. Am. Herpet., 2 ed., m1, p. 21, pl. m1.—DrE
Kay, Zool. N. Y., m1, p. 57 (1842).—Bairp and Girarp, N. Am. Serp.,
p. 145 (1853).—Batkp, Pac. R. R. Rept. x, p. 14, pl. xxiv, fig. 6 (1859).—
CopE, Proc. Phila. Ac., 1859 (p. 337).
1852.—Crotalus lucifer, BArRD and GIRARD, Proce. Phila. Acad., vr, p. 177.—Barrp
and GirarD, Cat. N. Am. Serp., p. 6 (1853).—Grirarpb, U. S. Expl. Exp.,
Herpet., p. 187, pl. xv, figs. 1-6 (1858).—Barrp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x,
Williamson’s R. in 1855, p. 10 (1859).—Cope, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859,
p. 337.—Copein Wheeler’s Surv. West 100 Mer., v, p. 533 (1875).—Cope
Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, p. 33, (1875).—Coopmr, Pac. R. R. Rep.,
XU, Pt. iii, p. 295 (1860).—Lorp, Natural. Vancouv. Isl., 11, p. 303 (1866)—
Lockinaton, Amer. Natural., 1880, p. 295.—GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.,
I, Ophid., p. 114 (1883).—Yarkrow, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, Check
List, pp. 12, 76 (1883).—Tow NSEND, Proc., U. 8. Nat. Mus., x, 1887, p.
239.—BEHR, Proce. Calif. Acad. Sc. (2) 1, June 1888, p. 94.—STEJNEGER, N.
Amer. Fauna, No. 5, p. 111 (1891).—STEJNEGER, N. Amer. Fauna, No. 7, p.
218 (1893.)—CouEs, Hist. Exp. Lewis and Clark, 111, pp. 898, 968 (1893).—
DENBURGH, Bull. U. 8S. Fish Comm., 1894, p. 57.—Caudisona lucifer,
Coprk, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn., p. 121 (1861).—Coprr, Proe.
Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 309.—CovEs, in Wheeler’s Surv. West 100 Mer., v
(p. 606) (1875).
1875.—Crotalus confluentus, (part) YARROW, in Wheeler’s Surv. West 100 Mer.,
V, p. 530.
1877.— Crotalus adamanteus atrox, STREETS, Bull. U. 8S. Nat. Mus. No. 7, p. 40 (not
of B. & G.)
1883.—Crotalus confluentus lucifer, Corr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1883, pp. 11, 19, 22.—
Cork, Proc.U. 8. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891, p. 692 (1892).—Copr, Proc. Phila.
Acad., 1893, p. 183.
1859.—Crotalus lecontei, HALLOWELL, Rep. Pac. R. R., X, Williamson’s Route in
1853, p. 18 (not of 1852).
1863.—Crotalus adamanteus, var lucifer, JAN, Eleue. Sist. Ofid., p. 124.
1883.—Crotalus oreyonus, var lucifer, GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.,1, Ophid., p.
aly(3%
1892.—Crotalus confluentus lecontei, CopE, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., xrv, p. 692 (not
of Ha!'ow.).
1868.—?Crotalus hallowelli, COOPER, in Cronise, Nat. Wealth Calif., p. 483 (nom.
nud.).—CoopEr, Proc. Calif. «cad. Nat. Se., rv, 1870, p.68 (nom. nud.).
Figures.—GiRARD, U. 8. Expl. Exp., Herpet., Atlas, pl. xv, figs. 1-6 (1858).—
Bairp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Williamson’s Route in 1855, pl. x1 (1859).—Hat-
LOWELL, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Williamson’s Route in 1853, pl. m1 (1859).—Stand-
ard Natural History, m1, pl. facing, p. 398 (1885).

Description.t—Muzzle broad. Scales between the superciliaries
(supraoculars) numerous, small, and uniform. Plates on the top of
head, 4 prefrontal, (internasals) 4 postfrontal (prefontals), or else irreg-
ular. Three rows scales between the suborbitals and labials. Labials
16 above; first and fifth largest; 15 below. Dorsal rows 25, exterior

* Probably so named with reference to its supposed diabolical appearance or nature.
t The original description by 8. F. Baird, in Baird and Girard’s N. Am. Serp., p. 6.

446 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

smooth, second and third with absolute carination. Tail and posterior

portion of body with 16 or 17 half rings. A succession of brown dorsal
hexagons or octagons, separated throughout by a narrow lighter line.
Light stripe from superciliary crosses the angle of the mouth on the
third and fourth row above labial.

Head very broad anteriorly, outline little tapering. Head above
covered with many small tuberculiform scales, showing a substelliform
radiation. Interval between superciliary plates filled with small scales,
nearly uniform in size; row bordering the superciliaries very smali.
Scales in front of the superciliaries variable; in one specimen there are
two rows of four each, of considerable size; in another they are larger
than the rest, but irregular. Scales on the cheeks large, flat, smooth.

Ground color, light brown above. Along the back a series of sub-
hexagonal or octagonal blotches, formed by a skeleton of dull yellowish,
constituting a dorsal chain. The space thus inclosed of the ground
color is margined faintly with dark brown; the width of the interval
between the successive blotches is from one-half to 14 scales. These
spots are frequently confluent, two and three running together. Where
most distinct the spots are 4 scales long and 11 wide. On each side of
this dorsal series is a second, separated by a single row of scales, the
blotches extending from the abdominal scutelle to the fifth or sixth
row. These are smaller than the dorsal, and subcircular. Opposite the
transverse light bands, and in the open space between four contiguous
blotches on the sides, smaller blotches are indistinctly visible. Poste-
riorly, the spots on the back and sides are confluent and darker; in one
specimen forming 17 half rings, encircling the back, leaving about 24
dorsal blotches. Abdomen greenish yellow, more or less clouded with
brown at the bases of the scales. Head dark brown; a light line from
posterior portion of the superciliaries along the fourth row of suprala-
bial scales back to the angle of the jaws, on the occiput, where it
expands into the color of the under part. Upper labials of the same
light color behind, rapidly widening anteriorly so as to include whole
front and side of the face, leaving only the top of the head dark. The
space about the facial pit darker. (See fig. 60).

The theory of coloration is that of decussating lines, which, when
they intersect, unite so as to have the angles of intersection truncated.

The species has a general resemblance to C. atrox in the arrange-
ment of the blotches, but is darker, and has about 17 dark half rings
posteriorly instead of 4 or 5. In CO. atrox the head is narrower and
more triangular, the space between the superciliaries narrow and occu-
pied by angulated larger scales, instead of small tuberculous ones. In
CO. atrox the row bordering the superciliaries is much larger than the
rest, and the scales on the top of the head generally more angulated.
In CO. lucifer the line on the side of the head (fig. 60), instead of going
directly from the posterior end of the superciliary to the commissures,
passes back nearly parallel to the mouth, crossing along the fourth row

ee

Report of National Museum, 1893,—Stejneger. PLATE 13.

PaciFic RATTLESNAKE,—CROTALUS LUCIFER.
From Baird, Pacific R. R. Rep.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 447

of scales above the labial. The second line in front of the eye is much
wider below in C. lucifer, and the face generally shows more of white,
while the dark portions are much darker,

Variation.—There is a great deal of variation observable in the vari-
ous specimens before us, particularly in the shape of the head, as well
as in the general coloration. As with most of these snakes, the char-
acteristic head pattern becomes gbsolete as the individuals grow large,
and this character, which is otherwise so constant and reliable in the
young, is sometimes difficult of application in very large and old ones.
However, I have yet to see a specimen in which the essential parts of
it can not be made out if care be exercised. The ground color also
varies greatly according to climatic and other local conditions, very
dark, nearly black specimens with strongly contrasted color pattern
in whitish being frequently found near the coast, or in mountain regions
with a very moist climate, while, on the other hand, specimens living
in the arid region among light-colored surroundings are often greatly
faded, as shown by various specimens from Utah and other portions of
the great basin. Upon an examination of a large series, however, I
can not find any more reliable or stable color difference than is usua! in
most species covering a large area and subject to varying, often very
restricted, local influences, and I can not see my way clear to recognize
any subspecies of C. lucifer on this account.

The difference in the outline of the snout and the proportionate
width of the head varies apparently greatly, as stated, though hardly
more than in several other species. These differences depend greatly
upon the general condition of the snake, upon the amount of venom in
the gland, and, in aleoholic specimens, upon their state of preservation,
specimens dried and hardened in too strong alcohol showmg a much
more pointed snout than those preserved in a moderately strong solu-
tion, while in soft examples kept in a too weak fluid the face is often
swollen and rounded.

It appears probable that Holbrook’s C. oregonus is based upon such a
hardened specimen, but as I have not been able to examine it I have
refrained for the present from exchanging the well-known name lucifer
for the older appellation. The material at my disposal is not suffi-
ciently extensive, nor is its quality sufficiently satisfactory to allow me
to pass a final judgment upon the question whether there really occurs
one or two subspecies or forms on the Pacific province, a question
which therefore must be considered still open.

Geographical distribution.— Crotalus lucifer is the characteristic snake
of the Pacific province as well as the northern portion of the Great
Basin. In southern California it occurs on the west slope of the coast
ranges of San Diego and Los Angeles counties from the sea level high
up into the mountains. Itiseven found on at least some of the islands
off the coast, as, for instance, Santa Catalina Island and Los Coronados.
In the southern part of the great interior valley of California this

448 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Rattlesnake is equally at home in the foothills and on the higher slopes
of the Sierra Nevada, at least up to an altitude of 8,600 feet above the
level of the sea. Inthe lower cultivated country it is rapidly becoming
extinct in some places, while on the other hand there are records of its
inerease in other localities. Dr. Behr (Proe, Calif. Acad. Se. (2), 1, 1888,
p. 94) has called attention to this curious circumstance with regard to
its occurrence in various localities around San Francisco Bay. Our
records for northern California are less complete, but it is undoubtedly
equally widely distributed in all suitable localities, though probably not
so high up in the mountains. Townsend (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., x, 1887,
p. 239) found it ‘pretty generally distributed, but more numerousin the
foothills of Shasta County than elsewhere. Very few snakes were met
with in the elevated coniferous forests, and none high up on the moun-
tains.” InOregon and Washington this species is still common in places.
In the early days of these states Dr. Suckley (Pac. R. R. Rep., x11, Pt. iii,
p. 295) found them to be so numerous at the Dalles as to be very annoy-
ing, having been known to enter dwelling houses. Dr. Cooper (I. ¢.)
states that they are much less numerous north of the Columbia River
than south, and also that none are found west of the Cascade Range,
exceptan occasional straggler carried down the Columbia River. How-
ever that may bein Washington, it certainly does not hold for Oregon, as
the National Museum possesses a specimen from Fort Umpqua (No.
4234). Lord (Naturalist in Vancouver Island, 1866, p. 303) says that at
the Dalles, the Snake, Pelouse, and Spokane rivers, indeed along the
entire boundary line between the British Possessions and the United
States west of the continental divide, and high up in the Rocky Moun-
tains “its name is legion.” The exact northern boundary of the species
in British Columbia is not recorded, but Mr. James M. Macoun, of the

Geological Survey of Canada, writes me that it is confined to a small —

area in the interior of British Columbia, bounded on the west by Lytton,
on the North Thompson River, being found in that latitude as far east
as Shuswap Lake. The farthest eastern record is about 10 miles east
of Okanagan Lake, in the vicinity of which they are very abundant.

This speciés evidently follows up the tributaries of the Columbia into
the interior, for a number of specimens were collected in Idaho, at Big
Butte and Little Lost River, by parties of Dr. Merriam’s Idaho explora-
tion party (N. Am. Fauna, No. 5, 1891, p. 111).

Whether the distribution of this species into Nevada is continuous to
- the north with the Oregon and Idaho localities remains yet to be seen,
though it seems probable. It is also continuous into the eastern por-
tion of northern California. Robert Ridgway, during King’s explo-
ration of the fortieth parallel, found it excessively abundant on the
little island in the Pyramid Lake, and also collected it at the Truckeé
River, and later explorers have also recorded it as common from that
neighborhood. Farther east it has been obtained in Nevada and Utah
by the various Government exploring parties at altitudes of 5,000 feet

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 449

and upwards, and in the southern portion of these States this Rattle-
snake almost certainly does not descend below 5,000 feet. Dr. Mer-
riam’s various parties, which in 1891 were scouring the mountain ranges
and deserts of Nevada and Utah south of the thirty-eighth parallel,
failed to find a single specimen, so that it seems almost certain that it
does not occur there. The records of this species from Arizona are
very dubious, as the specimens so recorded which I have had an oppor-
tunity to examine have either been misidentified, or else the locality
was very doubtful.

Habits.—The Pacific Rattlesnake undoubtedly in a general way shares
in the habits of its congeners, but is perhaps even less offensive than
most of them in spite of the fact that it often reaches dimensions which
might make it dangerous enough. It seems to prefer rocky places,
whether timbered or not, but it does not invade the desert proper.

THE TIGER RATTLESNAKE.

Crotalus tigris,* Kenn.
Plate 14.

1859.—Crotalus tigris, KENNICOTT, U.S. and Mex. Bound. Surv., 11, Rept., p. 14.—
Barrp, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Reptiles, p. 16 (1859).—Corsr, Proc. Phila.
Acad., 1859, p.338.—Copz, in Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p.534
(1875).—Corg, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, Check-list, pp. 33, 90 (1875).—
Corer, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xtv, 1891, No. 882, p. 693 (1892).—CoopER, in
Cronise, Nat. Wealth Calif., p. 483 (1868).—Coorsr, Proc. Calif. Acad.
Nat. Sc., Iv, p.66 (1870).—GaRMAN, Rept. Batr.N. Am., 1, Ophid., pp.
117, 175 (1883).—GaRMAN, List Rept. Batr. N. Am., p. 35 (1884).— Yarrow,
Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, Check-list, pp. 12,74 (1883).—Yarrow, in
Buck’s Ref. Handb. Med. Sc., v1, p. 166 (1888).—STEJNEGER, N. Am.
Fauna, No.7, Death Vall. Exp., p. 214 (1893).—Merriam, N. Am. Fauna,
No. 7, p. 215 (1893).—Caudisona tigris, Copr, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven.
Rattlesn., p. 122 (1861).—Copkr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 309.—Coukgs, in
Wheeler’s Sury. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 608 (1875).

Figures.—BatrvD, Mex. Bound. Surv., u, Rept., pl. tv (1859).—Barrp, Pac. R. R.

Rep., X, Rept., pl. xxx, fig. 1 (1859).

Description. j—Body slender; head small, very much depressed, nar-
row behind; nose remarkably broad and obtuse; whole outline of head
nearly quadrangular. Superciliaries (supraorbitals) and frontals smooth;
space between superciliaries very wide; 4 frontal plates (internasals),
6 post-frontals (pre-frontals). Two rows of scales between suborbital
chain (which is complete) and Jabials. Labials 14 above, 15 to 14 below.
Dorsal rows 21 to 23; very slightly carinated. Dorsal scales broad,
rounded behind. Color, yellowish ash above, with rather small, indis-
tinct dorsal brown blotches anteriorly; 2 posterior thirds of body banded
with brown.

* From the Latin tigris, a tiger, with reference to its yellowish color and tiger-like
cross streaks.
t Original description by R. Kennicott in Mex. Bound. Surv., 1, Rept., p. 14, from
type specimen, U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 471.
H. Mis. 184, pt. 2 29

450 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Variation.—Beyond the usual individual variation in number of scale
rows, loreals, labials, size of scales on top of head, etc., nothing special
has been noticed in the material examined. The color varies from
whitish to tawny. The head markings are rather indistinct, especially
the postoeular stripe, which is often lost in the dense sprinkling of
minute black dots covering the sides of the head.

Geographical distribution.—This rare snake was formerly only known
from a few localities in southern Arizona near the Mexican boundary,
until in 1891 the Death Valley exploration under Dr. Merriam extended
its range very materially into the desert mountains of southern Cali-
fornia and Nevada south of the thirty-seventh parallel, from Owens
Valley to the Great Bend of the Colorado, where these snakes were
found to be quite common, as Dr. A. K. Fisher and his party killed no
less than nineteen in or near Shepherd Canyon, Argus Range, Califor-
nia, during the latter part of April and first week of May, 1891 The
vertical range is considerable, as Dr. Merriam’s party collected speci-
mens at altitudes varying between about 2,000 and 6,500 feet above the
sea.

Habits.—The Tiger Rattler which has received its name, not from any
extreme degree of bloodthirstiness or fatal aggressiveness, but from its
tawny color and marked cross stripes, seems partial to the barren moun-
tain ranges with their rocks and crevices in preference to the desert
valleys surrounding them. Itis one of the smaller species and com-
paratively harmless, though, of course, a bite when inflicted might be
serious enough.

During the Death Valley expedition under Dr. C. Hart Merriam, a
specimen was found in a wood rat’s nest that was dug open. Its stomach
contained a kangaroo rat (Dipodomys) and a pocket mouse (Perogna-
thus), indicating nocturnal habits. .

Mr. Stephens, of the same party, on April 15, 1891, killed a pair of
these snakes which were on a ledge of rock, standing erect with their
heads near together, ‘apparently playing.” They were probably pur-
suing their amours, and the time would thus indicate the pairing season
of the species.

THE HORNED RATTLESNAKE,

Crotalus cerastes,* Hallowell.
Plate 15.

1854.—Crotalus cerastes, HALLOWELL, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1854 (p. 95).—HALLO-
WELL, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Williamson’s Route (p. 17) (1859).—Bairp,
U. S. Mex. Bound. Surv., 1, Rept., p. 14 (1859).—Barrp Pac. R. R. Rep.,
x, Reptiles, p. 16 (1859).—Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1859, p. 337.—CorE,
Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, Check-list, p. 33 (1875).—Copn, in Wheeler's
Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 534 (1875).—Corn, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., XIv,

of the deserts of Northern Africa.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger. PLATE 14.

TIGER RATTLESNAKE,—CROTALUS TIGRIS.
From Baird, Rep. Mex. Bound. Surv

PLATE 15.

Stejneger.

Report of National Museum, 1893.

ce
w)
<A
WwW

ae
Bs.
a
w

HORNED RATTLESNAKE,—CROTALUS CERASTES.

From Baird, Rep. Mex. Bound. Surv.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 451

CoopERr, Proc. Calif. Acad. Nat. Hist., Iv, p. 67 (1874).—Yarrow, Bull.
U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 24, Check-list, pp. 12, 73 (1883).—Yarrow, in Buck’s
Ref. Handb. Med. Sce., vi, p. 166 (1888).—GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.,
I, Ophid., pp. 116, 175 (1883).—GaRMAN, List N. Am. Rept. Batr., p. 35
(1884).—STEJNEGER, N. Am. Fauna, No. 7, Death Vall. Exp., p. 216
(1893).—MERRIAM, N. Am. Fauna, No. 7, p. 217 (1893).—Caudisona cerastes
Cork, in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn., p. 124 (1861).—Copr, Proc.
Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 309.—Copr, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1867, p. 85.—
Echmophrys cerastes Cours, in Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100 Mer., v, p. 609
(1875).

Figures: HALLOWELL, Pac. R. R. Rep., x, Williamson’s Route, pl.,iv, fig. 1
(1859). —BatirpD, Pac. R. R. Rep., X. Reptiles, pl. xxxv, fig. 4 (1859).—Barrp,
U. S. Mex. Bound. Surv., 11, Rept., pl. m1 (1859).—Jan, Icon. Ophid., livr.
46, pl. m1, fig. 5 (1874).

Description.*—Head small, angles rounded; nose obtuse, much
depressed; rostral as broad as high; nostril in the middle of a single
large plate (figs. 66,67). Lateraledgeof superciliary plate (supraocular)
elongated into a horn-like process directed upward over the eye. Two

Fig. 66. Fig. 67.
HEAD OF CROTALUS CERASTES, TOP VIEW. HEAD OF CROTALUS CERASTES, SIDE VIEW.
Cat. No. 482, U.S. N. M Cat. No, 482, U. S. N. M.

rows of scales between the suborbital series (which is complete of large
scales) and the labials. Upper labials 11 to 13, lower 12 to 13. Dorsal
rows of scales 21, slightly carinated; each scale along the middle of the
baek with a tubercular swelling toward the center. Crown tubercular.
Entire head and upper parts of a slight yellowish, with a dorsal series
of small, indistinct blotches, below which are several irregular rows of
isolated brown dots. A narrow, brown stripe extends from the orbit
back over the angle of the mouth. .

Geographical distribution.—In a general way the horned rattlesnake
inhabits the same region as C. tigris, viz, southern Arizona, California,
and Nevada, but while the latter inhabits the mountain ranges of this
area the former is more confined to the desert plains and valleys.

The type locality is Mojave Desert, whence Dr. Merriam, in 1891,
rediscovered it and secured specimens. His Death Valley expedition
brought home numerous specimens from nearly all the suitable locali-
ties visited, and he found it to be “the characteristic snake of the
Lower Sonoran deserts of the Great Basin, from southern California
easterly across southern Nevada to Arizona and southwestern Utah.”
We have received specimens from Mr. R. C. Orcutt, who obtained them

* Description hy R. Kennicott, in Mex. Bound. Surv., 11, Rept., p.14, from speci-
men in U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 482.

452 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

in the Colorado Desert, San Diego County, Cal., near Salton, from
Chrystoval, Ariz., and other places in the Gila and Colorado deserts.
It occurs at least as far east as Tempe, where we have specimens from
Dr. Wortman, and I myself have collected it at Vulture, Ariz.

Habits.—The Horned Rattlesnake is known locally as the “ side-
winder ” throughout its range, as Dr. Merriam explains, on account of
its peculiar mode of progression:

When disturbed it moves away sideways, keeping its broadside towards the
observer instead of proceeding in the usual serpentine manner.

Its feeding habits seems to be similar to those of the Tiger Rattler, as
a specimen collected by the Death Valley expedition contained a kan-
garoo rat and 2 pocket mice. As it is a small snake it is probably
comparatively harmless, though it has a very bad reputation, but there
is nothing to indicate that its venom is more virulent than that of the
other Rattlesnakes. Dr. Merriam’s parties brought home 15 specimens
and killed a good many more, but no one was bitten.

As to the breeding habits we have the following observation by Dr.
Merriam:

During the latter part of April and the early part of May these Rattlesnakes were
often found in pairs and were doubtless mating. At such times they remained out
in plain sight over night, instead of retreating to holes or shelter under desert
brush, and on two occasions they were found by us on cold mornings so early that
they were too chilled to move until considerably disturbed. I stepped on one of
these by accident as it lay in a compact coil with its head in the center, but it was
held so firmly by my weight that it was unable to strike. A moment before I had
killed its mate.

THE GREEN RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus lepidus,* Kennicott.

Plate 16.

1861.—Caudisona lepida, KENNICOTT, Proc. Phila. Acad., x11, 1861, p. 206.—COPE,
in Mitchell’s Res. Ven. Rattlesn., p. 124 (1861).—Aploaspis lepida, COPE,
Proce. Phila. Acad., 1866 p. 310.—Copr, in Wheeler’s Surv. W. 100 Mer., v,
p. 535 (1875).—Cop8, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, Check-list, p. 33 (1875).—
Yarrow, Bull. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, Check-list, pp. 12, 189 (1883).—
Crotalus lepidus, COPE, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1883, p. 13.—Cope, Proce. U. S.
Nat. Mus., xIv, 1891, No. 882, p. 692 (1892).—GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am.,
1, Ophid., pp. 117, 175 (1883).

Figures.—None.

Description.*—The top of the muzzle is covered by 8 smooth seuta;
the rostral plate is rather low, and isin contact with the prenasal; there
are 2 preoculars and 2 loreals; and but 2 scales separate the orbit from
the superior labial scuta. Of the latter there are 12 occipital scales
smooth. Scales of body in 23 rows, the 2 external on each side smooth.
Gastrosteges (ventrals), 153; urosteges (subcaudals), 27. The rattle
consists of 7 segments and a button, and narrows gradually towards
the extremity (fig. 68).

*From the Latin lepidus, pleasant. nice, smooth.

PLATE 16.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger.

‘WMAaSsN |, [RUOYBN 'S °Q 8yy Ul UeUTIDeds B UIOAY
*SNCIda1 SNIVLOYO—‘SYVNSSILLVY N3SYD

e* ‘
Roop Fe

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 453

The color above is greenish gray, which is crossed by 19 jet-black
rings on the body (fig. 54), which do not extend on the abdomen.
These rings are 24 scales wide on the middle line, and narrow down-
wards on each side so as to cover but 1 scale in width. The scales
which border the annuli are half black and half green, the effect of which
is to give the edge of the ring a turreted outline. The edges of the
ground-color are paler than any other part of the scales, thus throw-
ing the black into greater relief.
A large black spot, shaped lke 2
hearts side by side with the apices
posterior, marks the nape, and there
is an irregular small black spot on
each side of the occiput. Some black
specks between the orbits. No other Fig. 68.
marks onthehead. Near the middle HEAD OF CROTALUS LEPIDUS, SIDE VIEW.
of the gray spaces of the body some See eee a
of the scales of many of the rows have black tips. The tail is light
brown above and has a basal broad black, and 2 other narrow brown
annuli. Below, dirty white with closely placed shades of brown.

Variation.—Prof. Snow, in 1884, in a letter to the reptile department
of the National Museum, describes the fresh color of the specimen just
described, taken by him at the head of Water Canyon, New Mexico, in
August of 1881, from memory, as being of ‘an unmistakable glaucous
or grayish green” which contrasted beautifully with the jet-black bands.
In the specimens in the National Museum the bands are brown in the
center, black at the edges.

In the scutellation of the head there is some variation, but nothing
out of the unusual. The nostrils are comparatively small, and Kenni-
cott originally described the species as having them situated in an undi-
vided nasal, which afterwards led Cope to institute the genus Aploaspis.
The two heads upon which the species was originally based do not seem
to be in existence any more, but in the specimens which I have examined
there is certainly a division of the nasal at least below the nostril.
The upper preocular appears always to be divided vertically.

In 3 specimens examined by me the scale rows varied from 21 to 23;
the ventrals (gastrosteges), from 160 to 163; subcaudals (urosteges),
from 24 to 25.

Geographical distribution—This species, although apparently ex-
tremely rare, seems to occur all along our Mexican border, at least
from Eagle Passon the Rio Grande to Yumaon the Colorado. Since the
two heads collected by the Mexican Boundary Survey parties at Eagle
Pass and Presidio del Norte, no specimens have been recorded from
Texas. Prof. Frank Snow, however, in August, i881, obtained a specimen
at the head of Water Canyon, just west of Socorro, N. Mex. Shortly

* Description by E. D. Cope, in Proc. Phila, Acad., 1883, p. 13, from a New Mexi-
can specimen collected by Prof. Frank Snow.

454 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

after, Mr. E. W. Nelson sent a specimen to the National Museum from
Tucson, Ariz., the one figured, and recently Dr. Thimothy E. Wilcox
obtained it at Fort Huachucain thesame Territory. How far it extends
south into Mexico we do not know.

Habits.—Nothing is known about its habits except that it isa moun-
tain species, and as it is our smallest crotalus, its bite is probably pro-
portionately iess dangerous than that of the others.

THE WHITE RATTLESNAKE.

Crotalus Mitchellii,* Cope.
Plate 17.

1861.—Caudisona Mitcheilii, Core, Proc. Phila, Acad., 1861, p. 293.—Copr, Proce.
Phila. Acad., 1866, p. 310.—Crotalus Mitchellii Coprk, in Wheeler’s Sury.
West 100 Mer., v, p. 535, (1875).—Copn, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No.1,
Check-list, p. 33 (1875).—Copg, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 32, p. 90 (1887).—
Corr, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., xiv, 1891 (No. 882), p. 694 (1892).—DEN-
BURGH, Proc. Cal. Acad. Se. (2) 1v, 1894, p. 450.

1883.—Crotalus Mitchelli, YARROw, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, Check-list, pp. 12,
Ton 189:

1883.—Crotalus oregonus, var. Mitchellii, GARMAN, Rept. Batr. N. Am., 1, Ophid.,

7a

Dep lives

seas ie pyrrhus, STEJNEGER, W. Amer. Scient., vil, April, 1891 (publ.
June), p. 165 (in part).

Figures.—None.

Description.tj—Head depressed (figs. 69, 70), covered with small,
irregular scales, posteriorly keeled; anteriorly, and upon the obtuse
muzzle, rugged, tree at the lateral or hinder edges. Superciliaries
(supraoculars) prominent, striate rugose. One loreal; nostril large,
prenasal small, higher than long, separated from the rostral and supe-
rior labials by small scales. Rostral low, an equilateral triangle.
Sixteen superior labials, the last large, 5 rows between them and the
orbit; temporals large, smooth. Superior labials, 16. Scales elon-
gate, striate rugose, in 25 rows, all strongly keeled except the first.
Crepitaculuim (rattle) well developed, of the C. atrox type i. e., strongly
compressed, having the terminal complete segments as broad as the
basal. Gastrosteges (ventrals), 198; urosteges (subcaudals), 26. Total
length (excl. crepitaculum), 44 inches; tail, 3 inches 61. (Figs. 69, 70.)

The color above and below is grayish yellow. The upper surface of
the head is shaded, that of the body coarsely and densely punctulated
with brown. The regular aggregation and deepness of these punctu-
lations form a series of about 42 dorsal spots. These are transverse,
with produced lateral angles, extending across 12 rows of scales from
angle to angle, separated from the adjacent ones by a bright band of

*Named in honor of Dr. 8. Weir Mitchell, of Philadelphia.
t Original description, by E. D. Cope, in Proc. Phila. Acad., 1861, p. 293, from a
Cape St. Lucas specimen in Smithsonian Institution.

PLATE 17.

Stejneger.

Report of National Museum, 1893.

‘Unasny{ [BUOBN “SQ
UTISHOLI[A) SATIV LOYD

9] ul UeuITOeds B WOI
—‘SMVNSSTLLVY SLIHM

*

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 455

ground color, 1$ scales wide. On the posterior fourth of the total
length they form brown cross bands; 5 upon the tail are black on a
very light ground, as in C. atrox.. Anteriorly there is an ill-defined
series of spots which are opposite those of the dorsal line. A yellow
band extends from the nasal plates anterior to the eye, involving from
the ninth to the last superior labial. Superior to this is a brown band
extending from the eye and ceasing on a line with the angle of the
mouth. Some indistinct brown marks on the top of the head are
arranged as follows: One on the inner border of each superciliary; 3
posterior to these, the median short. and broad; 4 further posterior, the
median pair longer, diverging, reaching the neck.

Variation—The characters of scutellation hitherto relied upon for
distinction between C. mitchellii and C. pyrrhus, viz, the breaking up of
the large horizontal preocular of the former into 2 or more “loreals,” does
not hold, as Shown by specimens more recently received. Mr. Charles
Orcutt has sent us a specimen from the Colorado Desert, San Diego

Fig. 70.
HEAD OF CROTALUS MITCHELL, TOP VIEW. HEAD OF CROTALUS MITCHELLII, SIDE VIEW.
Cat. No. 12625, U. S. N. M. Cat. No, 12625, U. S. N. M.

County, Cal. (U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 16353), which is in all other respects
almost identical with Belding’s specimen from La Paz, Lower California,
(No. 12625), but with the preocular on one side divided completely; on
the other side, however, only with a faint indication of a division, while
another from the same locality has it divided on both sides. These
specimens I formerly identified as C. pyrrhus on this account, especially
as the specimen of so-called C. pyrrhus from the Mojave Desert, Califor-
nia, (No. 8669), has the preocular divided on both sides exactly as No,
16501 and the left side of No. 16353. This specimen is, therefore, also
a true C. mitchellii. The face scutellation of the type of C. pyrrhus (No.
6606) is practically identical with that of Dr, Loew’s specimen, from
the Mojave Desert, and the only difference which I can see consists in
the deep reddish color, a difference which can not be regarded as more
than subspecific, if indeed it is more than an individual variation. In
the California and Lower California specimens the ground color is pale
yellowish, almost white.

While reading the proofs of this article 1 received a paper by Mr.
John van Denburgh (Proce. Cal. Acad. Se. (2) Iv, pp. 450-455), who, from
an examination of 10 specimens in the California Academy from Lower
California, comes to the same conclusion. In these the granules be-
tween the nasal and the rostral occur indiscriminately, in one or two

456 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

series, and he shows conclusively that there is no difference between C.
mitchellii and C. pyrrhus in so far as scutellation is concerned. He
even goes so far as to assert that there is no color difference either, as
two of his specimens were “decidedly red.” I have myself seen speci-
mens more or less suffused with vinaceous-cinnamon or ochraceous-
rufous, but the color is essentially different from the red of the type
of C. pyrrhus, the status of which I, therefore, consider still unsettled.

Geographical distribution —Originally described from the Cape region
of Lower California from a specimen collected by Xantus and later
found in the same locality by Belding, it has but recently been discov-
ered in the Colorado and Mojave deserts of Southern California, those
from Colorado Desert being due to Mr. R. C. Orcutt’s zeal.

Habits.—This species seems to be a distinctive desert form, but
beyond this nothing is known of its habits.

THE RED RATTLESNAKE.
Crotalus Mitchellii pyrrhus,* Cope.

1866.—Caudisona pyrrha, COPE, Proc. Phila. Acad., xvit, 1866, pp. 308, 310.—
Cope, in Wheeler’s Surv. West 100 Mer., v, p. 535 (1875).—CougEs, in
Wheeler’s Surv. West 100 Mer., v, p. 608 (1875).—Crotalus pyrrhus, COPE,
Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, Check-list, p. 33 (1875).—Copr, Wheeler’s
Surv. West 100 Mer., v, pl. xxm (1875).—Copn, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus.,
XIV, 1891 (No. 882), p. 694 (1892).—YarRow, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No.
24, Check-list, p. 73 (1883).—Garman, N. Am. Rept., 1, Ophid., p. 114
(1883).—STEJNEGER, W. Amer. Scient., vu, April, 1891 (publ. June), p.
165 (in part).

1883.—Crotalus confluentus, var. pyrrhus, GARMAN, N. Am. Rept., 1, Ophid., p,
173.

1884.— Crotalus confluentus (B), GARMAN, List, N. Am. Rept. Batr., p. 34.

Figures.—W heeler’s Survey West 100 Mer., v, pl. xxi.

The status of this form has been discussed under the head of CO. mitch-
ellii. It may be well to remark that so far only one specimen of this
highly colored form has been obtained, and that the suspicion seems
well founded that it is but little more than an individual variation.

Description.t—Scales in 25 series, broad and rounded, the 2 inferior
rows smooth. Head short and very obtuse, the nostrils opening sub-
vertically. Superior labials higher than long, 3 rows of temporals
smooth; scales of vertex small, keeled; those more anterior, striate.
Superciliaries (Supraoculars) broad oval, striate. Canthus rostralis
none. Inferior labials 15, the first and second margining a plate which
meets its fellow in front of the geneials (chin-shields), and is in other
species a continuation of the first. Gastrosteges (ventrals), 178; uros-
teges (subcaudals), 24; joints of rattle, 9. The general tint of this

*From the Greek ruppdc (pyrrhos), flame-colored, reddish.
+ Original description by E. D. Cope in Proce. Phila. Acad., 1866, pp. 308, 310 from
type specimen, U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 6606.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 457

species is a bright salmon red, the scales of the inferior rows punctu-
late with brown. ©

Rostral broad as long; 7 [scales] between superciliaries, 3 below
orbits; labials, 14; 2 very small preorbitals and 4 loreals. Pale ver-
million varied with yellow on the sides of the belly, with numerous
arge reddish-bay transverse hexagons, which become transverse bands
on posterior two-thirds of length; yellow below.

Geographical distribution Only one specimen is known, viz: the
type which Dr. E. Coues obtained in Canyon Prieto, not far from Fort
Whipple, Arizona.

Habits.—Appears to be a desert form.

THE POISON OF THE POISONOUS SNAKES.

The deadly fluid which from time immemorial has inspired dread and
wonder in the human mind, not only by its fatal results but also by its
mysterious apparent variability, early became a subject of study and
speculation. More than two hundred years ago a ltedi and a Charras
published their observations on the European vipers and their poison,
and all through the eighteenth century experiments with various ven-
oms and their supposed antidotes were common. Some of the investi-
gators of those early dates did good work, notably the Italian savant,
Felix Fontana, who arrived at some results which, though contradicted
and unheeded by many authors who ought to have known better, have
been fully corroborated by the latest investigations.

Very little was discovered as to the real nature of the poison, how-
ever, the definite constituency of which the older experimentors had
no means of ascertaining. They could only know its grosser physical
characteristics, for chemistry, and especially organic chemistry, had
not yet reached such a development that it could tackle the intricate
problems involved in such investigations. All that was gained was a
prodigious number of so-called antidotes, most of which, in their turn,
were declared infallible, though very few of them ever gained a gen-
eral acceptance. In nearly all instances miraculous cures and surpris-
ingly sudden recoveries were recorded, but, sad to say, in other cases
even the best reputed remedies failed. It has remained for the last
decades to ruthlessly annihilate the claims of most of these “antidotes.”

Prince Lucien Bonaparte, in 1843, seems to have been the first to
make a chemical analysis of the viper poison, the result of his research
being that it is albuminoid or proteid in its nature. The supposed
active principle he called echidnine, or viperine. Less than twenty
years after, Dr. S. Wem Mitchell, of Philadelphia, commenced a series
of analyses and experiments on the poison of the rattlesnake, giving
a result similar to Bonaparte’s, the corroboration of the albuminoid
nature of the venomous substance, which in this case received the name
crotaline.

458 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

In the meantime organic chemistry, physiology, and bacteriology
made immense strides forward. The deadly work of the microbes
began gradually to be understood, and their action in the process of
putrefaction, as well as their role in many of the diseases which in their
symptoms recalled ‘those of snake poisoning, became known or
suspected; the ptomaines and the leucomaines were discovered; and
the chemists in their improved laboratories became enabled to deal
with the proteids, to separate them, and to classify them.

New theories as to the nature of the powerful poison were the
necessary result; some thought the toxic property due to the presence
of leucomaines, or alcaloid bodies; others preferred to regard the fatal
results as due to the work of some bacillus; others maintained its
albuminoid origin; while others again regarded a combination of all
these causes as the true solution of the question.

While works dealing rationally and scientifically with this theme
were few formerly and far between, one important discovery has fol-
lowed closely upon another during the last ten years, and, even at the
moment of publishing this, the writer is anxiously scanning each new
number of the various journals, magazines, and proceedings, for fear
that the latest mail may bring some important information that might
make it necessary to modify or even rewrite this account, lest it should
become antiquated even before it reaches the hand of the reader.

Before giving a résumé of these late discoveries, the methods of work
by which they have been obtained will be briefly discussed.

Attention is directed at the very outset to the fact that the poison
of the various kinds of snakes (we speak only of that of the elapoid
an viperoid snakes, as the poison of the opisthoglyph snakes has not
yet been investigated in the same manner) differs a great deal both in
external or physical qualities as well as in chemical composition, and
that the poisoning occasioned by its injection often shows very marked
symptomatic differences. Within certain limits these differences are
only those of degree, and it will be possible in the following to make
the statements somewhat general, though in the details there may be
slighter deviations according to the kind of snake we have to deal
with.

The first thing, of course, is to obtain the poison. The investiga-
tors prefer the fresh secretion, if it can be had, for although dried or
kept in alcohol the venom is not made innocuous, yet even a slight
modification of its properties is to be avoided if possible. A sufficient
number of live snakes is therefore highly desirable (Weir Mitchell at one
time had at least one hundred in his laboratory), for the quantity of the
fluid which each snake yields at any one time 1s comparatively small.

The methods for obtaining the venom are somewhat various. To
kill the snake in order to extract it from the glands directly is a waste
of material well to be avoided. The process of allowing it to bite into
a soft material from which it is afterwards extracted is open to the

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 459

objection that some of the fluid is lost, that it is unnecessarily brought
into contact with substances which may affect its nature more or
less, and that it is not obtained in a concentrated state, as it must be
washed out with distilled water. Dr. Weir Mitchell, after having seized
the snake by the neck with the tongs or loop, forced a saucer between
the jaws, into which the enraged animal would then bite vigorously,
leaving a quantity of the poison on the saucer. Prof. Kaufman having
experienced that the snake often breaks its teeth on such a hard sub-
stance, or even refuses to bite, used a stick covered with rubber. The
late Dr. C. S. Allen, of New York, for the same reasons covered the
mouth of a wineglass or similar vessel with an animal membrane
through which he induced the snake to strike the hollow teeth, the
fluid being squirted into the glass. Dr. Paul Barringer, of the Uni-
versity of Virginia, has, it seems to me, improved upon this method by
using several thicknesses of filtering paper, the object being to clean
the fangs of possibly adhering saliva, and thus prevent the venom from
coming in contact with foreign substances and the microbes inhabiting
them. |

The substance thus obtained is a more or less yellowish, exception-
ally colorless, transparent, sticky fluid, without any appreciable smell
or taste, easily soluble in water, insoluble in absolute alcohol or ether.
If vigorously shaken it becomes frothy. Examined under the micro-
scope, epithelial cells and other impurities are found, as well certain
albuminoid bodies resembling micro-organisms, but they do not respond
to the dye tests for bacteria, nor are they multiplied by cultures,
Drs. Mitchell and Reichert have demonstrated the presence of bacteria
(l.¢. pp. 6-7), but their own researches, aS well as those of others,
also show that they form no constant or essential accompaniment.

Mitchell and Reichert (/. ¢. p. 137) injected large quantities of the
pure micrococci from a sixth generation, in various manners, into
rabbits, cats, pigeons, etc., but no signs of any lesions resembling
those of venom poisoning were observed.

Drs. Wolfenden and Dawson Williams* endeavored to grow cobra
venom in gelatine, ‘‘ but without the slightest sueccess;” Dr. A. Viaud-
Grand-Maraist states that ‘bacteria and other protoorganisms are
seen to make their appearance when the solutions of the venom
commence to undergo alterations, but only then.”

Fredet is said to have made similar observations, and Kaufmannt
corroborates these statements from his own experiments.

Another essential point is, that even boiling, unless continued for a
long time, does not altogether destroy the poisonous qualities of the
fluid. Mitchell found that the rattlesnake poison suffers a gradual
mpairment of the toxicity of the venom increasing with the increase

* Journ. Physiol., Cambr., vir, 1886, p. 331.
t Diet. Encycl. Médec., Paris (3 ser.), rx, 1881, p. 388.
t Ven. Vip., 1889, p. 4; Vip. France, 1893, p. 23.

460 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

of temperature, but that it is still toxic even when boiled; Dr. Wall’s
experiments,* as quoted by Wolfenden, seem to show that cobra
poison resists the heat even better, for it is stated that prolonged
application of heat (for two hours) at a high temperature at last
destroys the toxicity of cobra venom, and that a dilute solution is
more easily destroyed by heating than a strong, such a toxie dilute
solution being destroyed afte” heating at 105° C. for half an hour.

When exposed to the air, even for a short time, the fluid poison takes
up bacteria, and putrefaction proceeds particularly rapid if the venom
be diluted with water. Continued alteration of this kind finally appears
to destroy its toxicity.

Excluded from the air, however, or preserved in pure alcohol or
glycerine, the venom retains its properties for almost any length of
time, as shewn by the fact that a glycerine solution in the possession of
Dr. Mitcheil for twenty years was still toxic.

Dried and kept from atmospheric humidity it is equally permanent,
twenty-two years not being able to alter it in the least. It is there-
fore advisable to handle the dried isolated fangs of the large venomous
snakes with caution. It dries somewhat like a gum or varnish, and
will crack and seale off in a similar manner.

In discussing the chemical characteristics of snake poison, it is
hardly necessary at the present day to refer to the now thoroughly
refuted theories of the crystalline nature of any of its active toxic con-
stituents. The last attempt (that of A. Wynter Blyth)? to prove the
poisonous quality of the cobra venom to be due to a certain “ cobric
acid” was effectually disposed of by Dr. Rk. Norris Wolfenden,{ and
need not detain us here.

_ There are, on the other hand, still some physiologists who are not
satisfied that the negative results obtained by Prof. Wolcott Gibbs at
the request of Drs. Mitchell and Reichert in their search for alkaloids in
the venom of the rattlesnake are absolute conclusive, in view of Dr.
Armand Gautier’s positive determination of leucomaines or alkaloids
derived from living protoplasm in snake poison. In his much discussed
article, ‘‘Sur les alealoides dérivés de la destruction bactérienne ou
physiologique des tissus animaux,Ӥ Gautier positively affirmed his
assertion of 1831 (Bull. Ac. Méd., Paris (2 ser.), x, 1881, pp. 947-953,
and discussion following, pp. 953-958) that from the venom of a Trigo-
nocephalus. and particularly from that of the cobra, he had been able
to extract a small quantity of matter belonging to the organic alkalis.
From the cobra poison he prepared two new alkaloids, which, among

*Indian Snake Poisons, 1883 (pp. 120-124).

+t The Poison of the Cobra de Capello. Analyst, 1, London, 1877, pp. 204-207.

t On ‘Cobric Acid,’ a so-called constituent of cobra venom. Journ. Physiol.,
Cambridge, vil, 1886, pp. 865-370.

§ Bulletin de VAcadémie de Médecine, Paris (2 ser.), Xv, 1886, pp. 65-97: 1 part.
Alcaloides bactériennes ou ptomaines; pp. 115-139: 11 part. Alealoides physiologiques
ou leucomaines.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 461

other peculiarities, possessed the property of immediately precipitating
Prussian blue when treated successively with ferrocyanide of potassium
and the ferric salts. He expressly remarks, however, that these alka-
loids do not constitute the most dangerous part of the venom, which
he asserts is of a nitrogenous nature. They seem chiefly to stupify,
but are not necessarily fatal. In the course of the discussion he fur-
ther emphasized the fact that these leucomaines in the normal state of
the tissues only occur in minimal proportions (tom. cit. p. 431).

Other careful investigations simultaneous with and later than those
of Prof. Gibbs have fully substantiated the claim that the leucomaines
play no role in the poisoning, and that, if present, they form no essen-
tial part of the venom. Dr. Wolfenden (loc. cit. p. 335) made examina-
tions of cobra venom by the Stas-Otto method for ptomaine, or alkaloid,
in three different instances, but did not succeed in finding the slightest
trace of any such body. There was neither trace of fixed nor volatile
alkaloid, the residues were noncrystalline and, moreover, nontoxic, and
gave none of the alkaloidal test reactions.

Prof. Gautier, as I have already intimated, insisted that the toxic
constituent of the venom is of a different nature. The researches of
the last ten years have proved beyond a shadow of doubt their proteid
nature, and that Bonaparte was correct when, in 1843, he referred to it
as an albuminoid.

The achievements during the last decade in the study of the chem-
istry of snake venoms have been of such a nature, are so recent, and
even now progressing, that the best way to record them is to treat them
historically and chronologically.

The first progressive step was taken when, in 1883, Dr. S. Weir
Mitchell and E. T. Reichert, of Philadelphia, laid before the National
Academy a preliminary report on the results of studies, which, after a
lapse of twenty years. Dr. Mitchell had resumed. He had in some way
become convinced that the complexity of the symptoms in snake
poisoning could not be the result of a single simple constituent, but
that they might be explained by the assumption of a similarly complex
nature of the albuminoid body, the crotaline, previously thought to be
simple. Dr. Mitchell, in a later popular article,* has given a clear and
interesting insight in the mental process which led to the important
discovery and the laboratory processes by which it was demonstrated,
from which we make the following abstracts:

When I first studied this strange poison I thought of it as a single albuminous
body. As such it had always been regarded since it had been proved by Prince
Bonaparte to belong to the albumens. When once I chanced to think that venom
might be a complex fluid, holding in solution more than one poison, reasons for such
a belief multiplied, and so excited my interest that, in 1882, with Prof. Reichert’s
aid, I began to put my theory to the sharp test of experiment. To prove in the

outside laboratory what the inside mental laboratory has comfortably settled is not
always easy, and many months of careful research were required before the answer

*Century Magazine, N. York, xxxvi, Aug. 1889, pp. 503-514.

462 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

came to us. I will try to make clear our methods and results. When a little of the
venom is placed in sufficient water it dissolves readily. If now we heat the solution
a coagulation takes place, just such as happens when white of egg hardens on boil-
ing. If by means of a filter we separate this substance, clotted by heat, it is found
to be mnocuous. The clear fluid which passes through the filter is, however, pois-
onous, but does not cause much local effect. Asa whole the poison has been damaged
by heat, presumably because one or more of its ingredients had been injured by heat.
The next step is to learn if the substance made solid and inert by boiling can not be
separated in some other way and in such a form as will leave it also poisonous.

Allsoluble substances are divisible into two classes, one of which will pass through
an animalmembrane into a current of pure water, and one of which will not. Those
which can so pass are said to be dialysable, and the filter is known as a dialyser, and
the process is called ‘‘ dialysis.” We disolve some of the poison in water and put it
in an inverted funnel, the wide mouth of which, being covered with a thin animal
membrane is placed in distilled water. Under these circumstances the water goes
through the membrane, and dilutes the fluid above it and certain substances pass out
to the water.

The matter which thus finds its way out to the water is said to be dialysable.
When examined it proves to be poisonous—to be uncoagulable by heat, and to be the
same as the matter left unaltered when we boil the diiuted poison for a few moments.
This substance resembles the albuminous matter which is formed when gastric juice
digests white of egg, and as the material so obtained is called peptone, we name our
product which passed through the dialyser to water venom peptone.

As the thinner water enters the dialyserand the peptone goes out within the vessel
there falls down a white substance, which is easily redissolved if we add a little com-
mon salt. It falls out of solution because the salts belonging to venom and which
keep the white matter dissolved are, like all saline substances, dialysable and pass
out along with the peptone. This white precipitate has certain likenesses to the
albuminous bodies known as globulin, and of which there are several kinds in our
bodies. That which falls out of the solution of venom we named venom globulin.

The final results of Mitchell’s and Reichert’s investigations were
embodied in a fine quarto volume published by the Smithsonian Insti-
tution in 1886 as one of its “Contributions to Knowledge ” under the
title ** Researches upon the Venoms of Poisonous Serpents,” to which
we must refer the reader for details.

There are in those results, with regard to the chemical nature of the
venom, two points, however, to which I will call particular attention as
being of a fundamental nature, and which the readermust keep steadily
in mind if he wishes to understand the present status of the question,
viz. first that the crotalus poison, as'well as the cobra venom, consists
of several proteids, two of which are preponderating, although present
in a varying degree. One of these, the globulin, is not dialysabie; the
other proteid, which passes through the membrane of the diaylser,
Mitchell referred to the peptones, though possibly it belongs to another
class, as will be seen later on.

The second point is that these two chief constituents are present in
differeut proportions in the various poisons, the globulin occurring
mostly in the crotalid snakes, but only in a minimal quantify in the
cobra. This difference in the’composition of the venoms corresponds
markedly with the difference in the symptoms accompanying poisoning
by the Crotalide (and the nearly related Viperide) on the one hand, and

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 463

by the Najide or cobras (and the nearly related Hlapide) on the other,
as will be shown further on.

Simultaneously with Mitchell and Reichert’s report there appeared in
England a couple of articles by Dr. R. Norris Wolfenden of a scarcely
less import, he, however, having had the benefit of the preliminary report

‘by his American precursors. He published them in the Cambridge
- Journal of Physiology under the common title ‘On the nature and
action of the venom of poisonous snakes,” the first one being a treatise
on “The Venom of the Indian Uobra, Naja tripudians,” the second “A
Note upon the Venom of the Indian Viper, Daboia russelii.”

Wolfenden’s results are in the main the same as those of Mitchell and
Reichert. Pursuinga different method of subdividing the proteids there
are some differences in detail, which mean very little so far as the general
result is concerned, but there is also one disagreement as to the nature
and the nomenclature of the dialyzable portion. Mitchell referred it,
as we have seen, to the peptones, but Wolfenden maintains that it can
not possibly be a peptone since it is precipitated by acetic acid and
potassic ferrocyanide. He.on the other hand, refers it to the albumoses,
and in his analysis of the daboia poison he names it ‘‘albwmose or syn-
tonin.” Thisis therefore practically thesame as Mitchell’s venom peptone.

Wolfenden found in the cobra an overwhelming quantity of the
globulin, but scarcely any albumose; in the daboia, on the other-
hand besides the globulin, a certain quantity, proportions not given, of
‘“‘albumose or syntonin,” which seems to be more difficult to dialyze than
the crotalus proteid of the same class. As will be seen, Mitchell’s con-
clusions were amply and independently confirmed.

The very latest studies of the chemical nature of the venom are those
of Dr. C. J. Martin and Mr. J. M’Garvie Smith, of Sydney, Australia,
who have successfully investigated the poison of the Australian black
snake, Pseudechis porphyriacus, a very dangerous snake related to the
Indian cobra.* Their results corroborate in the main those of their
predecessors, and in their endeavor to identify the various proteids
which constitute the venom, they successfully separated three proteids,
viz., “one an albumin, and the other two albumoses. The albumin is
not virulent, but the two albumoses (corresponding to proto and hetero-
albumoses of Kiihne) are extremely poisonous. They each have the
same physiological action and this is the same as that produced by the
venom itself.” |

It is one of the great merits of Mitchell and Reichert’s work that
they undertook to test directly upon the venom the numerous chemical
antidotes which from time to time have been suggested or from their
known action on similar substances seemed to give promise of favorable
results. It was found that many are worthless, that in fact only a few

*Proc. Roy. Soc. U. 8. Wales, Aug. 3, 1892, and Journal of Physiology, xv, 1893,
(p. 380). See also W. D. Halliburton’s paper on ‘‘Snake Poison” in Science Pro-
gress, 11, Sep, 1894, pp. 1-9.

464 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

exert such an influence upon the venom as to inake them available as
local antidotes. We emphasize local, because from the very nature of
the poison as an albuminoid and consequently chemically closely related
to normal constituents of the blood, there can be no chemical antidote
which after the introduction of the venom into the cireulation would

be able to destroy the poison without also destroying the blood itself.

I wish to call attention here to the fact that Mitchell repeatedly
makes distinction between the poisoning resulting in death within a
few hours and when it is slower in coming. He found that in the most
rapid poisoning there is frequently nothing appreciable to the naked
eye beyond the slight local lesion, or here and there minute capillary
hemorrhages, when death has been delayed beyond a minute ; while in
examples of chronic poisoning, both the local and the systemic changes
are enormously more extensive. This distinction between local and
systemic changes is one of considerable importance, since the rational
treatment of any given case hinges upon the full understanding of this
point.

Only two years pass, and another very important contribution to our
knowledge of the intricate question of snake poison was published,
this time by a Russian, Dr. E. A. Feoktistow, the same whose work on
the rattle of the rattlesnake we have already had the occasion to quote
In 1888 he issued a doctor dissertation with the following title: Expe-
rimentelle Untersuchungen iiber Schlangengift,* based upon about 400
experiments with the fresh venom from about 200 specimens belonging
to several species of vipers and Crotalus durissus. His researches
cover to a great extent those of Mitchell and Reichert. In some cases
the disagreement between the results of these eminent students is
highly perplexing; for instance, in regard to the effect of the venom
upon the blood and the blood vessels. The disagreement as to the
causes of death as formulated by Mitchell and Reichert, on one hand,
and Feoktistow on the other, also seems startling at first, for the former
conclude that death occurs through paralysis of the respiratory cen-
ters, paralysis of the heart, hemorrhages in the medulla, or possibly
through the inability of the profoundly altered red corpuscles to per-
form their functions, and they positively assert that the direct action
of the venom upon the nervous system, save as concerns the paralysis
of the respiratory centers, is of but little importance, while Feoktistow
with equal positiveness concludes that the snake venom is a nerve
poison par excellence, which paralyzes the vaso-motor center, and in
large doses the respiratory center as well. It is impossible for us here
to carry out a comparative analysis of the two works, but I think it
will be found that the disagreement between these authors is more
apparent than real, and that it consists more in the interpretation of

*St. Petersburg, 8vo., 47 pp.; a preliminary article in Mém Ac. Se. St.-Pétersb.
(7°, sér.) XXXvI, No. 4, 22 pp., under title: Eine Vorliufige Mittheilung itiber die
Wirkung des Schlangengiftes auf den thierischen Organismus.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 465

the phenomena than in the results of the experiments themselves. But
it would be a thankful task for an experienced physiologist to correlate
all the facts, to eliminate possible errors, to reexperiment where there
may be doubt as to the facts, and to weigh the evidence impartially
for and against the various explanations. His work would not have
to be confined to the works already mentioned, for the very next year
there appeared another independent treatise of considerable importance.

In 1889 the French Academy of Medicine, in Paris, awarded the
Orfila prize for 1888 to M. Kaufmann, professor of physiology at the
veterinary school at Alfort, in recognition of his studies of the venom
of the common viper of France, Vipera aspis.* Kaufmann’s work is for
the greater part a study of the action of the poison of the viper upon
the nerves, the circulation, and the tissues, and of certain chemical
antidotes upon the venom. It corroborates that of his predecessors,
anil shows the similarity of action of the viper venom to the crotalus
venom, but it also contains several valuable new observations and new
discoveries.

I have said that Mitchell has already called attention to the differ-
ence between the rapid and slow poisoning. Feoktistow niade similar
observations, but Kaufmann has emphasized it still more, and in part
based his study upon this difference. His experiments, to a greater
extent than his predecessors’, were separately directed upon ascertain-
ing the results of the injection of the venom directly into the cireula-
tion and those following only its hypodermic application to the tissues.
The results deserve a closer examination here.

Injected directly into the veins of the animals experimented upon,
the venom produces its effects with almost lightning rapidity, consist-
ing in nervous, circulatory, respiratory, and digestive disturbances.
The nervous disturbances consist of a primary excitation of very short
duration, followed by a drowsiness, which lasts until death; the intel-
lectual faculties are not impaired for a long while, but the general sensi-
bility, as well as the voluntary and reflex movements, are rapidly
affected. The circulatory disturbances consist in an enormous lowering
of the arterial tension, due to a considerable vascular dilatation, princi-
pally in the abdominal digestive viscera; in a considerable acceleration
of the pulse, and in a very great feebleness of the blood waves propelled
by the heart. The respiration and calorification do not unaergo pro-
found alterations, only a slight diminution of their activity being
observed. The conclusion is reached that the death which follows the
introduction of the venom into the circulation must be attributed to
gastro-intestinal apoplexy and the stupefying action exercised directly
upon the nervous system. This is in confirmation of Feoktistow’s
views.

The hypodermic injections produce both general systemic effects
identical with the above, due to the absorption of the po?szu into the

“Du venin de la vipere. Mém. Acad. Méd., XXXVI, 1889, and separate.

H. Mis. 184, pt. 2 30

466 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

circulation, and local effects which develop at the point of injection
and in the adjoining tissues. These local lesions consist in a more or
less intense swelling, and in a purple or black discoloration produced
by extravasation of blood and serum in the tissues affected by the
venom. The death, which is due to the direct absorption of the venoin,
arrives very rapidly, and the characteristic internal hemorrhages are
observed; the death, however, which is the consequence of the infee-
tion of local origin is slower, and the ordinary internal lesions are not
found, but, on the contrary, considerable local alterations. The danger
from the injection varies with the part of the body inoculated; thus
injections of venom made on the inner side of the thighs or on the nose
are very dangerous; those practiced on the side of the thorax muscles
less so. The micro-organisms accompanying the local lesions are only
accidental and secondary productions; they find excellent conditions
for their propagation and multiplication in the altered or mortified
tissue, but inoculated into healthy animals they do not produce the
specific effects of the venom. After the injection under the skin, the
poison is slowly diffused in the adjoining tissues and determines their
progressive alteration without itself being altered in any way, for the
venom can be traced in its full activity in the local lesions, and serum
taken from the altered tissues, if injected into healthy animals, devel-
ops the ordinary effects of the venom; this serum, consequently, con-
tains a certain quantity of active venom. On the other hand, venom
does not accumulate in an appreciable quantity neither in the liver, the
kidneys, nor the nervous centers, as serum taken from these tissues
has remained inactive in animals inoculated with it.

Mitchell and Reichert had confirmed the destructive action of certain
chemicals upon the venom and discovered others of similar action,
notably permanganate of potassium, ferric chloride, iodine and bromine.
To these Kaufmann adds chromic acid, which he highly recommends as
a remedy for the local lesions.

The tact that chromic acid in a solution of 1 to 100 is one of the
reagents which produces the greatest precipitate in the venom, besides
being an energetic oxidizer, led Prof. Kaufmann to institute a series of
very interesting experiments with it, which only lack of space prevents
me from reproducing here in their entirety. Suffice it to say that they
prove conclusively the potent and beneficent action of the chromic acid,
not only when it is injected mixed with the venom, but also when intro-
duced some time after the poisoning. Thelast experiment of the series
(No. XXxv) is very instructive. Four dogs of about equal size were
inoculated on the inner side of the thigh with two drops of fresh viper
venom obtained immediately before the injection. One was left with-
out further treatment, the others had injected in the puncture, five
minutes after, respectively 1:100 solutions of chromic acid, perman-
gvanateof potassium, and bichoride of mercury. The following morning
all showed local congestions, and in the evening of that day the dog

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 467

which had received no remediary injection died. On the third day, in
the one treated with chromic acid the local congestion was red, in the
other two edematous and blackish. On the fourth day the reddening
had almost disappeared in the former and no ulceration was to be
observed; in the dog treated with permanganate the discoloration had
also nearly disappeared, but there was a large ulcer, whilethe one treated
with bichloride of mercury had not even improved so much. They after-
wards all fully recovered. Kaufmann sums up the result of this experi-
meit as follows: This experiment demonstrates that the three agents
employed have preserved the animals from death; the bichloride has
the inconvenience of producing a caustic action, forming a scar and a
wound long to heal; the permanganate, although less destructive, also
leaves a wound which takes long time in scarifying, while the chromic
acid most completely checked the action of venom without occasioning
any cauterization or ulceration.

The point essentially proved by the above experiment is the relative
superiority of the chromic acid over the permanganate and the bichlo-
ride of mercury.

Three years later, Dr. Albert Calmette, surgeon of the first class of
the colonial medical staff and director of the bacteriological institute
at Saigon, Cochin China, published a similar series of experiments*
with a solution of chloride of gold, upon the venom of the cobra. He
claims to have secured quite a success in saving the animals experi-
mented upon, the experiments being conducted very much like those of
Kaufmann, by injection of the venom mixed with the chemical, and by
injecting them separately, the latter as late as five minutes after the
former. Very litle can be gathered from his experiments as to the
efficacy of the chloride of gold in counteracting the local disturbances
as compared with that of chromic acid, because of the slight local
ettects of the cobra venom. Whether the chloride of gold in this respect
is the equal of the chromic acid is therefore doubtful, although from the
facts that it forms an insoluble precipitate with the venom and that its
eauterizing effect is but slight, it may probably be inferred that there
is but little difference between them.

Dr. Calmette has recently +t recommended a solution (1:11) of chloride
of lime as superior to the chloride of gold, it being effective up to fifty
minutes with rabbits which would otherwise have died in two hours.

Unfortunately for Dr. Calmette’s claim for the efficacy of chloride of
gold, an English physiologist,t undertook a series of similar experi-
ments with an entirely different result. From his criticism it would
appear as if the whole treatment of local neutralization of the venom

Paris, VI, 1892, pp. 160-183; also, Arch de Méd. Nay., Paris, Lv111, 1892 (pp. 161-190) ;
see also Brit. Med. Jour., Weekly Epitome, 1892, April 23 (p. 67).

t See McClure’s Magazine, III, October, 1894, p. 466.

} Chloride of Gold as a Remedy tor Cobra Poison, by A. A. Kanthack. Lancet,
London, 1892, 1, pp. 1296-1297.

468 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

by injection of a chemical destroyer at the wound is chimericai, but,
such a conclusion, it seems to me, would be premature to say the least.
It is true that the introduction and non-efticacy of the venom mixed
with the chemical proves nothing as being practically no venom; 1t is
also true that the introduction of the chemical five minutes after the
bite would be of but little practical use if five minutes were the extreme
limit for its beneficial action. It is also undoubtedly true that even
within this time it is not always capable of, alone and unassisted, to
save the life of the patient. On the other hand, it must not be for-
gotten that the above experiments had been chiefly theoretical, and
that no means were taken to assist the remedy experimented with. It
is rather singular that the experimenters should not have extended
their experiments somewhat, and it is particularly surprising that those
testing the efficacy of the local treatment should not have introduced
the use of ligatures to a greater extent. By thus confining the action
of the poison to the neighborhood of the point of inoculation the
experimenter would probably have been able to extend the period
within which the chemical agent showed itself beneficent considerably
beyond the five minutes. I think this is a point worthy of consider-
ation by those contemplating future experiments with local chemical
remedies.

After the important discoveries of Mitchell and Reichert as to the
multiple chemical composition of the snake poisons,it was but nat-
ural that the attention of the searchers for remedies was principally
drawn in the direction of looking for local chemical destroyers. It was
also natural that these researches should prevail in those countries in
which the crotalids and the vipers predominate, because of the local
destructiveness of the poison of these snakes. But the other side was,
fortunately, not lost sight of, and the search for remedies to counteract
the poison after it has reached the circulation, was naturally carried
on most vigorously in the home of the najid and elapid snakes, in
India and Australia.

Mitchell had already pointed out the hopelessness of finding a chem-
ical which, introduced into the veins, would be able to destroy the
poison without also destroying the blood. The only rational line of:
research would be to discover such remedies as would, to use Mitchell’s
words, ‘‘oppose the actions of venom upon the most vulnerable parts of
the system,” or, as he calls them, ‘physiological antagonists.” It will
be remembered that Mitchell and Reichert came to the conclusion that
‘there can be no question, however, that the respiratory centers are
the parts of the system most vulnerable to venom, and that death is
most commonly due to their paralysis.” Although, according to them,
paralysis of the heart generally only plays a secondary role in the case
of snake poisoning, yet the cardiae power 1s sensibly enfeebled, especi-
ally in the early stage. The kind of remedies to be looked for would

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 469

consequently be such as will stimulate the vital functions of respiration
and circulation.

The remedy which to them seemed to hold forth the greatest promise
of success was alcohol, a stimulant the effects of which are well known;
which is, moreover, usually readily at hand, and which has been exten-
sively tried for the purpose. It has been used both by the layman and
the practitioner, often with apparent success, and its application has
undoubtedly saved many a life. On the other hand, reports are ‘numer-
ous of patients having died which were under the influence of liquor
when bitten, or to whom whisky was afterwards administered. But it
is safe to say that in most of these cases the alcohol had been taken in
excess so as to depress instead of stimulate the vital functions. It
can not be emphasized too much, or too often, that intoxication, so far
from helping the cure, helps the poison, and that persons having been
made intoxicated beyond excitement, when under treatment for snake
bite, and yet recovered, have so recovered not from the treatment but
in spite of it. It should also be remembered that the alcohol has no
beneficent direct action upon the venom; on the contrary, applied
locally or intravenously, it seems to add to the virulence of the poison.

Notwithstanding all that has been written about the utter uselessness
of ammonia, we see still occasionally in medical literature reports from
physicians who have obtained cures in spite of its application. Injected
directly, it is worse than useless. It should not at this late date be
necessary to fill pages in order to emphasize this fact, which has been
conclusively demonstrated by all rational experiments from the time of
Fontana to that of Mitchell and the other physiologists of to-day.
Internally, as a stimulant, it has also been shown to be much inferior to
alcohol. The radical defect of ammonia in severe cases consists in the
fact that it increases the arterial pressure, thus aiding the poison in
producing the internal hemorrhages.

The remedy which has come prominently to the front durmg the last
five years, however, and which really seems to come up to all reason-
able expectation, is a poison scarcely less terrible than the snake venom
itself, viz, strychnine. The theory upon which the application of this
drug has been based is, on the one hand, that the snake poison acts as
a specific nerve poison, depressing and more or less suspending the
function of the motor nerve centers throughout the body without inter-
fering with the structure of the nerve cells, and, on the other, that the
physiological action of strychnine upon the same organs is diamet-
rically opposed to the action of the venom, or, in brief, that “ strychnine
is the exact antithesis of snake poison in its action.” To use the words
of the main advocate of strychnine as an antidote:

Whilst snake poison turns off the motor batteries and reduces the volume and force
of motor-nerve currents, strychnine, when following it as an antidote, turns them

on again, acting with the unerring certainty of a chemical test, if administered in
sufficient quantity. Purely physiological in its action, 1t neutralizes the effects of the

470 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

snake poison, and announces, by unmistakable symptoms, when it has accomplished
this task, and would, if continued, become a poison itself. Previous to this announce-
ment its poisonous action is completely neutralized by the snake poison, and the lat-
ter would therefore be equally as efficacious in strychnine poisoning as strychnive
is in snake poisoning. *

J am not aware that this test has been applied, but I may here call
attention to the fact that Dr. A. O. Ameden, of Glens Falls, N. Y., by a
similar train of reasoning, was led to apply rattlesnake poison to a case
of tetanus apparently with most signal success. t

It seems that the great discovery of strychnine as the antidote par
excellence was barely missed by Dr. Louis Lanszweert, who in 1871
published a short article, ““Arseniate of Strychnia: New Antidote to
the Poison of Snakes,” ¢ in which he somewhat vaguely refers to five
cases successfully treated by him in San Francisco, as well as to some
equally successful experiments made by him in Paris upon rabbits.
It is evident that he regarded the arsenic as the antidote, and 1t is not
at all clear why he added the strychnine, except that by this addition
he obtained “a more readily soluble substance than arsenious acid.”
It is now well known that arsenic is no specific antidote, and it seems
almost certain that the success of Dr. Lanszweert’s treatment was due
to the strychnine. From what I have shown above, Dr. Ameden, in
1883, came also dangerously near making the same discovery.

It has recently been claimed that Dr. John Shortt, of India, as early
as 1868 experimented with strychnine, but that it was given up on
account of the failure of experiments upon animais Dr. Shortt’s efforts
may possibly have been published in the unprofessional local press;
but in 1868 as well as in 1870 he recommended liquor potassz as an
antidote, without mentioning strychnine. The honor of the discovery
can, therefore, not be claimed for him.

This was reserved, however, to a then obscure Australian practi-
tioner, Dr. A. Mueller, of Yackandandah, Victoria, who in 1888, in the
most positive mannner, claimed that he had practically proved strych-
nine to be the specific antidote by the success of his cures, and to have
demonstrated the scientific correctness of the theory by accounting
satisfactorily for all the phenomena observable in connection with the
subject.

Dr. Mueller’s discovery, which was published in a series of articles
in the Australasian Medical Gazette, in Sydney,§ at once started a vig-
orous, sometimes even acrimonious, discussion in Australia, and the

* On Spake Poison, by A. Mueller, 1893, p. 42.

t Serpent Venom as a Remedial Agent in Tetanus. Medic. News, Phila., 1883,
XLUI, p. 339. Also, Crotaline as a Remedy in Tetanus. Med. and Surg. Rep.,
Phila., 1883, x~rx (p. 642). Also, Rattlesnake Venom in a Case of Tetanus.
Albany Med. Ann., 1885, vi (p. 91).

t Pacif. Med. and Surg. Journ., San Francisco, Aug. 1871 (n. s.), V. pp. 108-115.

§ On the Pathology and Cure of Snake Bite. Australas. Med. Gaz., 1888, 1889, VII,
pp. 41-42 (1); pp. 68-69 (11); pp. 124-126 (111) ; pp. 179-182 (Iv); pp. 209-210 (v).

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. A771

strychnine was most earnestly tested and enthusiastically indorsed by
Dr. Mueller’s followers, while his antagonists of the old school went to
the other extreme of denouncing the subcutaneous injection of the
drug in snake venom cases as being of equal value to so much water.
The medical journals of the colonies from that time on are full of the
controversy, which soon spread to India.

The opposition gleefully recorded several cases of death in spite of
the administration of strychnine. In addition they clamored tor a
series of experiments upon animals by which the theory could be
“ scientifically ” tested, at the same time pointing out that the experi-
ments which had so far been undertaken did not seem to support Dr.
Mueller’s contention.

These criticisms Dr. Mueller has met by explaining in an apparently
satisfactory manner why in the fatal cases reported the treatment had
failed, it being mostly due to the fact that not enough strychnine had
been administered. As to the experiments on animals, it was con-
tended that the physiological effects of strychnine upon man and the
various kind of test animals is so different that no safe conclusions
can be drawn, and that, moreover, the numerous tests afforded by the
cases of human beings having been bitten and saved from death by

the administration of the strychnine is the best possible proof of its
efficiency.

From an article recently published (Australas. Med. Gaz., Sydney,
xu, December 15, 1893, pp. 401-403) it will be seen that the opposition
to the strychnine treatment is on the wane and that the Governments
of Australia and India are alive to the importance of Dr. Mueller’s dis-
covery. The latter, in his recent book,* furthermore states that he
knows from good authority that Sir Joseph Fayer, the president of the
medical board at the India office, the celebrated authority on snake
poison, and author of the monumental work ‘The Thanatophidia of
India,” has recommended to the English Government the adoption of
the strychnine treatment of snake bite in India. It is but fair in a
case like this to render the results of Dr. Mueller’s discovery in his
own words. Hence the following quotations from his book, which I
have deemed it essential, should be as full as practicable, especially
since his work has so far received but little attention in this country:

It is self-evident from preceding statements that in the treatment of snake bite
' with strychnine the ordinary doses must be greatly exceeded, and that its adminis-
tration must be continued, even it the total quantity injected within an hour or two
amounts to what in the absence of snake poison would be a dangerous, if not a fatal,
dose. Timidity in handling the drug is fraught with far more danger than a bold
and fearless use of it. The few failures among its numerous successes recorded
during the last four years in Australia were nearly all traceable to the antidote not
having been injected in sufficient quantity. LEvenslight tetanic convulsions, which
were noticed in a few cases, invariably passed off quickly. It should be borne in
mind that of the two poisons warring with each other, that of the snake is by far

*Snake Poison and its Action. Sydney, 1893, p. 70.

472 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

the most insidious and dangerous one, more especially in its effects on the vaso-
motor centers. The latter are wrought very insidiously and where they predom-
inate require the most energetic use of the antidote; for whilst the timid practi-
tioner, after injecting as much strychnine as he deems safe, stands idly by waiting
for its effects, the snake virus, not checked by a sufficient quantity of it, continues
its baneful work, drawing the blood mass into the paralyzed abdominal veins, and
finally, by arrested heart action, bringing on sudden collapse. In such cases even
some tetanic convulsions are of little danger and may actually be necessary to over-
come the paralysis of the splanchnicus and with it that of the other vaso-motor
centers.

Whilst then it must be laid down as a principle that the antidote should be
administered freely and without regard to the quantity that may be required to
develop symptoms of its own physiological action, the doses in which it is injected
and the intervals between them must be left to the practitioner’s judgment, as they
depend in every case on the quantity of snake poison absorbed, the time elapsed
since its inception and the corresponding greater or lesser urgency of the symptoms.
If the latter denote a large dose to have been imparted and it has been in the system
for hours, delay is dangerous and nothing less than 16 minims of liq. strychniz P.B.,
in very urgent cases even 20 to 25 minims, should be injected to any person over 15
years of age. Even children may require these large doses, as they are determined
by the quantity of the poison they have to counteract and are kept in check by it.
The action of the antidote is so prompt and decisive that not more than fifteen to
twenty minutes need to elapse after the first injection before further measures can
be decided on. Ifthe poisoning symptoms show no abatement by that time, a second
injection of the same strength should be made promptly, and unless after it a
decided improvement is preceptible, a third one after the same interval. As the
action of strychnine when applied as antidote is not cumulative, no fear need to be
entertained of violent effects breaking out after these doses repeated at short
intervals) 45

If under the influence of these large doses the symptoms abate, or if the latter are
comparatively mild from the first, smaller doses of strychnine should be injected, say
from one-fifteenth to one-tenth of a grain, but under all circumstances the rule that
distinct strychnia symptoms must be produced before the injections are discontinued
should never be departed from. ‘This rule is a perfectly safe one for its observance
entails no danger, a few muscular spasms or even slight tetanic convulsions being
easily subdued and harmless as compared with that most insidious condition exem-
plified in case No. 1, cited below, the first one treated with strychnine by the writer,
who, having no experience in the treatment, did not administer quite enough
strychnine. The patient, after apparently recovering from a moribund condition
and being able to walk and even to mount a horse, remained partly under the
influences of the poisonand succumbed to it during sleep, when, according to subse-
quent experience, one more injection would have saved him.

The tendency to relapses is always great when much snake poison has been
absorbed. Apparently yielding to the antidote for a time, the insidious venom, after
a shorter or longer interval during which it appears to have been conquered, all at
once reasserts its presence, and has to be met by such fresh injections, regardless of
the quantity of strychnine previously administered, but the amount required in
most relapses is not a large one.

In speaking of the applicability of the treatment to bites of snakes
with longer fangs and more powerful venom than those of Australia,
he concludes as follows:

‘In those cases only where the long fangs of these snakes perforate into a vein
and a large quantity of venom injected into the blood stream overpowers the nerve
centers so as make death imminent, if not almost instantaneous, the subcutaneous

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. A473

injections may be found of little use. Here intravenous injections of half a grain
and even 1 grain doses would appear to be indicated, and might yet fan the flame
of life afresh, even when respiration and pulse at wrist have already ceased. We
have seen both these functions extinct in Australia and restored by comparatively
small doses of the antidote, and can see no reason why a more energetic use of it
should not restore them in India

Dr. Mueller next enumerates in detail 50 cases, only 2 from his own
practice, some of them very remarkable and several, as it seems, quite
conclusive, but as none of these cases were caused by snakes directly
related to our American poisonous serpents, except to the Hlapide, it is
not thought necessary to reprint any of them here. The first case
reported is the one alluded to above, the first case treated by Dr.
Mueller with strychnine. The case ended fatally.

The death of the unfortunate lad, however, has saved some lives since. It taught
the writer the lesson never to trust to the apparent success of the antidote until it
shows distinct signs of its own physiological action, and even then to watch his
patients carefully for the first twenty-four hours, and let them sleep for short periods
only.

The cases from India reported by Dr. Banerjee, also reprinted in the
book, have been assailed as unreliable, but since the publication of the
book others have been recorded in the Indian Medical Gazette, for 1893,
and reprinted in the Australasian Medical Gazette (see, for instance,
two in Vol. x11, January 15, 1894), which seem to indicate a success for
the treatment in India as great as in Australia.

An entire chapter 1s devoted to the unsuccessful cases, which are
analyzed and explained. The last one Dr. Mueller finds to convey a
new lesson even to him, as he draws from it the conclusion that the
antidote can only be relied on within the first twenty-four hours after
the bite.

It can not for a moment be supposed that the discovery of the strych-
nine treatment will be accepted as the final settlement of the question
of a physiological antidote. As a matter of fact, our knowledge of the
physiological action of the various venoms is as yet but imperfect, and
the physiological properties of many of the drugs which may be called
to play a role are not better known. Experiments are still carried en,
but as no definite results have as yet been obtained we shall only men-
tion them very briefly.

In 1888, Dr. H. C. Yarrow published a series of articles in Forest
and Stream concerning ‘“‘Snake bite and its Antidote.”* In the intro-
duction he gives an interesting historical sketch of the search for anti-
dotes, and then submits in detail a series of experiments of his own,
among which I wish to call special attention to those with jaborandi,
or its alkaloids pilocarpine and jaborine, the use of which was first

*Forest and Stream, N. Y., xxx; Pt. 1, May 10, 1888, p. 307; Pt. 11, May 17, pp.
327,328; Pt. 11, May 24, pp. 349, 350, and May 31, pp. 369,370; Pt. 1v, June 7, pp.
3865-388 ; Chapters 1 and ut also reprinted in Albany Medical Annals, 1888, 1x, pp.
ZOLA 1c,

474 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

introduced, it seems, by the French physician, Dr. Josso.* Rabbits
and fowls were inoculated with crotalus poison and treated with extr.
jaborandi, both hypodermically and in the stomach. It appears that
the rabbits recovered even from a fourfold lethal dose of the venom,
while in the fowls the effect of the antidote was less marked, as it was
only capable of prolonging but not saving life.

Another drug which if might possibly pay to experiment with is
strophanthus, as suggested by Dr. T. L. Bancroft, of Australia. In
short, there is yet a wide field open for the investigators.

The beneficial effects of the jaborandi are probably to be ascribed to
the influence of this drug both upon the skin and the liver, and this
fact opens up another question which must be taken into consideration
before we conclude this chapter, viz, the question as to the way in
which the poison is eliminated by the system; for it is plain from alk
that we now know of the physiology of the case that when the poison
has once entered into the circulation all that can be done in this diree.
tion is to counteract its immediate effect upon the nerve centers, thus
prolonging life and enabling the system to throw off the poison. Any
remedy that would assist in doing so would bea distinct help. But in
order to find such a remedy it is necessary to know exactly how the
poison is finally got rid of. Unfortunately, this is a point upon which
no conelusive studies have been made. As already mentioned, experi-
ments have been made which go to show the presence of the venom in
the liver, kidneys, etc., although in but small quantity. I am not
aware that there has been made any extended experiments to ascertain
the presence of the poison in the perspiration, a point well worth
investigation in view of the fact that there are cases of severe systemic
poisoning which have been reported + cured simply by means of pro-
fuse perspiration. Inoculation of urine of the bitten subject has been
occasionally undertaken to test the presence of venom, and fatal results
have been reported, but the experiments have not been conducted in
such a way as to satisfy us that death was not due to the ptomaines
contained in the urine.

However, Feoktistow found, in addition, gross anatomical changes in
the kidneys of poisoned cats, and Dr. Mueller has recently ¢ called atten-
tion to the probability that the snake poison is eliminated through the
kidneys.

Quite recently Dr. Konrad Alt, of Germany, in a paper read before
the Natural History Society of Halle on the Saale, on July 23, 1892, §
has demonstrated that a portion of the venom, at least, is eliminated by

*Gaz. Hebdom. de Médec. et Chir., Paris (2 ser.), 1882, xIx (p. 835).

t For instance: W. H. Wooster, New Treatment for Snake Bite and other Poisons.
Science, xx, Nov. 4, 1892, pp. 255, 256.

t On Hematuria in Snakebite Poisoning. Australas. Med. Gaz., Sydney, XiI,
Aug. 15, 1893, pp. 247-249.

§ Untersuchungen iiber die Ausscheidung des Schlangengiftes durch den Magen.
Miinch. Medic. Wochenschr., xxx1x, Oct. 11, 1892, pp. 724-728.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 475

the stomach. Two sets of experiments were made upon dogs. In the
one set the stomach was washed out carefully, the result being that the
animals so treated showed a distinctly less degree of poisoning than the
control animals. In the other set, the contents of the stomach with
proper precautions were inoculated into other dogs, the result being
symptoms of poisoning identical with those of the control animals.
Moreover, the presence of the unaltered venom was demonstrated by
chemical tests.

The conclusion seems justified that a washing out of the patient’s
stomach ought to be part of the treatment of a case of snake bite.

This entire question seems a promising field for future investigation,
which we earnestly recommend to physiologists having the opportunity
and wishing to advance our knowledge of snake poison and its treat-

ment.
TREATMENT.

It is not for the present writer to recommend any one special treat-
ment of cases of snake-bite poisoning; but he is willing to state what
would seem to be a rational treatment, in view of our present knowl-
edge of the subject. He will, however, confine himself to such cases as
may arise from poisoning by snakes occurring in this country only.

Evidently the first thing to ascertain is whether the case is really that
of a bite by a poisonous snake, deaving here out of consideration the
opisthoglyphs, the bite of which probably is too rare and too insignificant
to need special mention. If consisting of one or of two isolated punc-
tures, the wound is almost certain to be caused by a poisonous bite, and
the distance between the two punctures will usually give a clew to the
size of the snake and consequently to the presumable degree of the
poisoning. If the snake or its head are secured, the identification may
be comparatively easy, as all our poisonous snakes, with the exception
of the Hlaps, or harlequin snake, of the Southern and Southwestern
States, are readily recognized by the pit between the eye and the
nostril, as before stated (p. 365, fig. 9). The characters of the Hlaps
have also been given in this work (p. 356, figs. 5,7, 8), and no difficulty
Should be found in making a correct identification. As will be plain
from what has been said above concerning the difference in the action
of the crotalid and the elapid snakes, this distinction may be of some
importance in selecting the correct treatment.

In very severe acute cases, in which the venom has been injected
directly into the circulation, no matter by what kind of snake, the
chances for recovery are very slight indeed. The only chance in
such cases seems to be to stimulate the nervous centers as speedily
as possible, the best known means to this end being injection of large
doses of strychnine, if necessary, intravenously, until tetanic effects are
obtained and the patient roused from the coma which has probably
seized him. This result obtained, other systematic or local remedies, as
the case may require, can then be applied.

A76 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

A similar treatment also seems advisable in such cases of slow poison-
ing in which the patient has already reached a stage of collapse, or
coma, before assistance can be rendered, provided not more than
twenty four hours have elapsed since the bite was inflicted, in which
case injections of strychnine seem inapplicable.

If in case of slow poisoning help can be administered very soon after
the infliction of the wound and the venom has been localized by liga-
tures and minimized by incision of the wound, sucking, or, better, cup-
ping of the blood, the treatment next to be applied depends upon
whether the offending snake is a Pit Viper (Crotalid) or an Hlaps, for if
it was a rattlesnake, a copperhead, or a water moceasin, attention
should at once be directed to the local lesion, unless the state of the
patient imperatively demands an immediate stimulant, in which case
small doses of aleohol may be useful. Apparently the best treatment
of the local lesion is an 1 to 100 solution of chromic acid injected into
the incised wound, the punctures of the fangs, and into the surrounding
swelling, as quickly as the circumstances will allow, since the success
of this treatment depends upon the chemical reaching and destroying
the venom before it is absorbed into the circulation. Kneading of the
tissues surrounding the wound in order to bring the venom and chemi-
cal in close contact may be useful. If chromic acid is not at hand.
chloride of gold, permanganate of potassa, etc., may be substituted.

There does not seem to be any necessity for amputation in a case
where hypodermic injection of any of these chemicals can be applied.
It can only be recommended in such extreme cases in which these
remedies are not to be had, and the danger great. But even in this
case the amputation must follow quickly or not at all.

The local lesion having been attended to, the general systemic treat-
ment may commence, as by this time the venom has probably already
entered the circulation, it being necessary occasionally to loosen the
ligatures for a moment to prevent mortification. Alcohol in small
doses and washing out of the stomach may now be in order, as well as
the administration of sudorific and diuretic remedies, preferably
extract of jaborandi. Hypodermie injections of 15 to 20 minims of
liqu. strychnie repeated every twenty minutes until slight tetanic
spasms appear, seem to be warranted. Constant watching for relapses
and attention to the local lesion will do the rest.

The action of the venom of the elapid snakes being so much more
rapid and the local changes so insignificant as not to cause any great
alarm, the chances are that when the patient asks for help and treat-
ment the venom has already entered the circulation, and that attempt
to destroy any appreciable quantity of the poison in the wound would
be futile. However, whenever possible this should not be neglected.
The usual first treatment would nevertheless be general, viz, the
administration of stimulants, sudorifics and diuretics as instanced
above, since the danger from a quick paralysis of the nerve centers is
so nuch greater in these cases.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 477

It may be well to emphasize here, that in the case of children the
amount of the antidotal remedy to be administered must not be judged
by the age of the child, but by the amount of venom to be counter-
acted as well as by the character of the snake, and it is worth remem-
bering in this connectioun—besides the different action of the crotalid
and the elapid snakes—that the degree of danger chiefly depends upon
the size of the snake; that of our pit vipers the rattlesnake is the most
dangerous, the copperhead less so, and the water moccasin the least
so, although in itself not to be trifled with.

As tor the preliminary treatment before medical assistance can be
obtained or rational remedies applied, but little can be added to the
old methods employed. The first thing to be done is to tie a strong
ligature or two, a string or a handkerchief, between the wound and the
heart, whenever practicable; next, cutting deeply into the punctures so
as to make the blood flow freely; sucking out of the blood from the
wound, a procedure perfectly harmless, unless the person doing it has
an open wound in the mouth; next, careful loosening of the ligature so
as to admit a small quantity of fresh blood to the ligated member in
order to prevent mortification; next, administration of a stimulant; if
at hand, small doses of an-.alcoholic liquor being given internally at fre-
quent intervals; if alcohol is not at hand, and a stimulant ‘appears
imperative, a small dose of ammonia might be given, but only very
shortly after the bite, not on a later stage when it will certainly do
harm, at least in cases of poisoning by rattlesnake, copperhead, or
water moccasin; if the patient has to wait for the arrival of a doctor,
now is the time to try all reliable means to produce a profuse perspi-
ration.

There may occasionally be such extreme cases in which amputation
and cauterization by heat or otherwise would be the only available
remedies, but as a rule such barbaric treatment need not be resorted
to, and in most cases would probably be a cure worse than the disease.

There has been placed on the market several specially constructed
contrivances for use in cases of snake bite, to which I wish to call
attention.

A cupping instrument specially constructed for snake bite so as to
be easily applicable to small surfaces or the extremities was made
several years ago by William Hume, instrument maker, Lothian street,
street, Edinburgh, Scotland, at a price of 10s. 6d.

In France, MM. Pelliot & Delon, 26 Rue du Roi-de-Sicile, Paris, at
the instance of Prof. Kaufmann, have arranged a pocket case contain-
ing hypodermic syringe, chemicals, directions for use, ete., for the local
treatment by chromic acid. Price, 6 francs.

Kaufmann’s own directions for the injection of this fluid are as
follows:

Two or three drops of an aqueous solution (1 to 100) of chromic
acid or permanganate of potash are injected with a Pravaz syringe
exactly into the puncture of each fang. It is necessary to let the

A478 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

liquid penetrate into the tissues to the same depth as the venom; the
injection must, therefore, be more or less deep according to the size of
the snake. To make absolutely sure, three or four more similar injec-
tions are made a little distance around the point bitten.

If, at the time of treatment, the swelling has already obtained a
certain size it may be necessary to make injections .into various points
of the tumor. After the injections the part is pressed gently with the
hand so as to distribute the injected fluid in all directions and facili-
tate its mixture with the venom. Next, some punctures are made with
the point of a knife. Usually a rather large quantity of yellowish
serosity flows from the wound, mixed with a part of the injected fluid.
In order to facilitate this discharge the swelling should be kneeded
repeatedly with the hand. Then the surface should be washed with
the permanganate or the chromic solution, and a small piece of lint
soaked with one or the other of these liquids applied. If, after some
time, the swelling continues to grow, additional injections into the parts
must be made as. well as punctures. With this treatment the tissues
preserve their vitality; the skin does not turn black but remains red.
The microbes are destroyed by the injected agents, which act as anti-
septics as well as antidotes.

For the strychnine treatment the Australians have also constructed
a pocket case containing patent poison sucker, hypodermic syringe
with two needles, glass mortar and pestle, two tubes of strychnine
tabloids, and directions for use. The manufacturer is L. Bruck, 13
Castlereagh street, Sydney, and it, sells for £1.

It seems as if a combination of these two cases would be the thing
for this country, and ought to be of great service not only to physicians
residing in those parts of the States in which poisoning by snake bite
is not unusual, but also to such persons who from their occupation are
particularly exposed to dangers of this kind.

PREVENTIVE INOCULATION—THE IMMUNITY OF SNAKES AGAINST
SNAKE VENOM. \

It has been noticed from time to time by various experimenters that
animals which had recovered from snake-venom injections showed a
certain amount of resistance afterwards, so as to make them useless
for future experiments. It naturally suggested itself to investigators
that by continued inoculation of small doses of the pure or modified
venom, immunity from the poison, even in otherwise fatal doses, might
finally be obtained.

Such a preventive inoculation, although of doubtful use in this
country, with its comparatively small number of fatalities from snake
bites, might be highly beneficial in India and Australia, or to travelers
or others in tropical countries, who might be specially exposed to such
dangers.

Asearly as 1887 Prot. Henry Sewall, of the University of Michigan,

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 479

undertook and reported * upon a series of experiments with massa-
sauga venom on pigeons. The conclusions drawn were that repeated
inoculation with sublethal doses produced a continually increasing
resistance toward the injurious effects of the poison without apparent
influence on the general health of the animals. It was also shown,
however, that the efficiency of resistance against the venom gradually
fails in absence of fresh inoculation, although at least one of the
pigeons retained its immunity over an interval of five months.

There is another class of observations which have a certain bearing
on this question.

It has been long known, although occasionally doubted or contra-
dicted, that the poisonous snakes are proof against their own venom.
Big doses of snake venom have repeatedly been inoculated into the
bodies of the producers themselves absolutely without effect. The cur-
reut stories of “suicides” of rattlesnakes are easily explained, and in
none of the many cases reported is there any conclusive proof that
death resulted from a self-inflicted wound. It is also well known that
a number of the so-called harmless snakes remain, unaffected whether
bitten by a venomous snake, or inoculated in the laboratory with enor-
mous doses,

Considerable light has very recently been thrown upon this curious
iinmunity, as well as the question of preventive inoculation, by the
studies and experiments of two French physiologists, C. Phisalix and
G. Bertrand, who are at the present moment, I believe, still engaged in
further work along the same lines. They have published a series of
articles in the Comptes Rendus of the French Academy of Sciences,
describing their experiments with the venom of the viper. Having pre-
viously found thatthe blood of the toad and the salamander contain the
sane toxic principles they turned their attention to the viper. Guinea
pigs were injected with the blood of the viper and died within two hours
under the ordinary symptoms of Viper-bite poisoning; the post mortem
examination gave the same result; and an examination of the poison in
the viper blood showed it to be insoluble in aleohol. The authors con-
clude that there exists in the blood of the viper some agent similar to
the venom; that it is due to an internal secretion of the glands, and
that the presence of this toxic principle in the gland must be considered
as the true cause of the immunity of the viper from its own venom.t

The next step was to examine the blood of some of the poison-proof
harmless snakes, the two French species of Natrix being selected for
the purpose. Guinea pigs injected in a similar manner as in the
experiments with the viper blood gave similar results—they died in two

*Experiments on the Preventive Inoculation of WAtiGAaEs Venom. Tae
Physiol., Cambr., 1887, vit, pp. 203-210.

+ Toxicité du sang de la vipere (Vipera aspis, L.). Compt. Rend. Ac. Se. Paris,
CXVU, No. 26, Dec. 26, 1893, pp. 1099-1102. Extr. in Rey. Scientif. (4), 1, No. 1, p.
23 (1894).

480 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

hours with all the symptoms of viper-bite poisoning. Having thus
determined that there exists in the blood of the Natrix a poisonous agent
in at least as great a quantity as in the viper and that the immunity
of these snakes also is due to this cause, the question naturally arose
as tothe origin of the venom in the “ harmless” snakes—in other words,
by which organs is the venom furnished to the blood. Successive inoe-
tation of organic extracts of the principal intestines, liver, pancreas,
spleen, thymus, thyroid body, aud salivary glands give the result
that only those of the latter had any effect at all and that this effect
showed the characteristics of viper-venom poisoning. The natural
conclusion is that the presence of venom in the blood of the harmless
snakes is due to internal secretion of the salivary glands.*

The authors referred to had now reached the stage when they could
look around for a suitable attenuation of the venom in order to secure
a proper “vaccine,” and they found that heat had this effect. Some of
the results obtained by them by heating are not new—for instance, that
boiling the viper venom for a few seconds affects it in such a way as to
disassociate from it the local phenomena, the undestroyed portion left
being practically elapid, or cobra, poison. When the authors there-
fore heated a lethal dose of viper venom and, after cooling, inoculated
it into a guinea pig, they did practically nothing but inoculate the
animal with a much reduced, nonfatal dose of cobra venom. Theresult
of their experiments shows that this vaccination with the thus attenu-
ated venom results in a certain amount of immunity. t

Naturally the authors next experimented with a view to ascertain
the effects of the blood of the animals thus vaccinated. The experi-
ments demonstrated the presence of the venom in the blood serum
after three days (21st to 24th of January), and that this blood serum
also possesses vaccinating properties. { Of course, the results having
been published on Fevruary 12, sufficient time had not lapsed to deter-
mine if the immunity thus obtained is lasting. The authors seem to
be hopeful of obtaining such modifications of the blood as will enable
them to utilize it as a therapeutic agent. Experiments and time alone
will show.

It is but fair to add that Dr. Calmette claims priority for the dis-
covery of the ‘“‘serum” vaccine treatment. §

* Sur la présence de glandes venimeuses chez les Couleuyres, et la toxicité du sang
de ces animaux. Compt. Rend. Ac. Se. Paris, cxviu, No. 2, Jan. 8, 1894, pp. 76-72.

t Atténuation du venin de la vipére par la chaleur et vaccination du cobaye contre
ce venin. Compt. Rend. Ac. Sc. Paris, cvuir, No. 6, Feb. 5, 1894, pp. 288-291.

tSur la propriété antitoxique du sang des animaux vaccinés contre le venin de la
vipeére. (Compt. Rend., Ac. Sc., Paris, cxvut1, No. 7, Feb. 12, 1894, pp. 356-358.)

§ See Henry J. W. Dam. Inoculation against Snake Poison. Dr. Calmette’s Experi-
ments at the Pasteur Institute, Paris. McClure’s Magazine, m1, October, 1894, pp.
460-468.

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. 481

EXTERMINATION OF POISONOUS SNAKES.

It can be stated as a general rule that our poisonous snakes are
decreasing rapidly in numbers, and that consequently the danger from
their bites is constantly diminishing. In many localities where rattle-
snakes were formerly numerous they have now become entirely exter-
minated, while in others they are extremely rare. The causes that
have led to this are various, but the commonest cause is undoubtedly
the increasing cultivation of the country. In other places the decrease
in the number of the snakes can be traced directly to their being killed
off by the hog, an animal certainly not proof against the venom if it
enters the circulation, but usually well protected by its fat, which is in
most cases sufficiently thick to prevent the fangs of the serpent from
penetrating to the underlying tissues.

From other localities there is reported a similar decrease without it
having been possible to offer a satisfactory explanation. As a striking
illustration of this, I may cite the experience of an exploring party
under Dr. C. Hart Merriam, camping for several months at the base of
the San Francisco Mountain, Arizona, in 1889. The party consisted of
a number of naturalists, specialists in mammalogy, ornithology, herpe-
tology, and botany, who were busily engaged in studying the fauna
and flora of that mountain for several months during the summer. Yet
not a single rattlesnake was collected or seen by the party in that
locality where twenty-five years previously Dr. EK. Coues had collected
quite a series of them, belonging to several species, during a compara-
tively short stay, notwithstanding the fact that the character of the
country has apparently not changed in any essential particular. It
has not been brought under cultivation; there are no hogs running
about, only herds of cattle; no regular burning over of the ground
takes place; no special enemies could be discovered; a few people pass
occasionally through the district, and fewer still live there permanently.

On the other hand, there are instances on record of localities in which
certain species of poisonous snakes have actually increased. This may
occur in places, for instance, where the land was formerly burned over
regularly every year, thus destroying the snakes in great numbers.
Dr. H. H, Behr* attributes the increase in the number of rattlesnakes
in some localities not far from San Francisco to the killing off of the
enemies of the snake, notably birds of prey and other snakes, and
probably correctly, while Mr. Hurter (Trans. Acad. St. Louis, v1, 1893,
p. 258) reports a similar increase in western Illinois as due to the new
stock law compelling swine to be penned up.

The poisonous snakes have a great many natural enemies which keep
them in check, but there does not seem to exist in this country any
animal which makes a specialty of the business and is particularly

* Proce. Calif., Acad. Sci. (2), 1, 1888, pp. 94-99.
H. Mis. 184, pt. 2——31

482 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

adapted for it, with the possible exception of some of the harmless
snakes. We have seen that the latter, at least a great many of them,
are poison-proof, and thus have but little to fear from the bite, and it is
a well known fact that some of them are able to kill and eat a poisonous
snake at least equaling them in size. Among the most redoubted enemies
of the rattlesnake is quoted the common king snake or chain snake,
Lampropeltis getulus, and the remnants of poisonous snakes are often
found in the stomachs of other species.

This fact emphasizes the desirability of a correct discrimination
between the poisonous kinds and the harmless snakes. The former
ought to be killed and, if possible, exterminated wherever found; the
latter should not only be spared, but protected and their multiplication
encouraged, as they rank among the best friends of the farmer and the
gardener.

I do not know whether it has ever been tried anywhere in this
country to pay a bounty or a premium per head, or rattle, for the
extermination of the dangerous snakes, but it is occasionally suggested,
and may deserve a moment’s reflection in this connection, notwithstand-
ing the fact that there are but few localities in North America in which
the really dangerous snakes are numerous enough to render even an
experiment with bounty desirable. It would be different, of course, if
the system should have proved to possess any merit or to have been
followed by success in countries where it has already been tried. A
brief mention of some of the more noteworthy attempts in this line will
show, however, that such has not been the case.

It has been tried and is still in vogue in India, where large sums are
paid annually for the purpose. But it does not seem to do much good,
except perhaps the moral effect in a country in which the dreaded
cobra* is considered sacred by a great portion of the population. Even
in the little island of Martinique, it appears to have had but scant
effect in diminishing the number of the deadly “ fer-de-lance.”t+

Prof. Kaufmann, in his book so often referred to, on the other hand,
indorses the system as having been instrumental in diminishing the
number of vipers in France, and submits that if it has not always
given good results where it might be expected, the reason is solely that
the system has not been applied in a thorough manner, in other words,
that it has not been adopted over the whole country. In defense of
this he appends a table showing the number of vipers killed in three
‘“‘departments” (counties) since the beginning of the system. The
table is very interesting, but as the results are very similar in all three
( Haute-Saone, Doubs, Jura), I shall not weary the reader with more
columns of figures than those from the department of Haute-Saone as
being most characteristic.

* For an illustration of this dangerous snake see pl. 18.
t See pl. 19.

Report of National Museum, 1893.—Stejneger. PLATE 18

INDIAN COBRA,—NAJA NAIA.
After Fayrer’s ‘“‘ Thanatophidia of India.”

iy Owy Da
» a
e

o-HAAK ~ y tr.
s 4
=A

Report of National Museum, 1893.— Stejneger.

PLATE 19.

WEST INDIAN “‘ FER-DE-LANCE ’’,—BOTHROPS LANCEOLATUS.

From a specimen in the U. S. National Museum.

+4,

POISONOUS SNAKES OF NORTH AMERICA. A483

Premium, Number | ‘Premium Number
Year. | per j|of vipers | Year. per of vipers
| viper. | killed. | viper. killed.
Franes. Franes.
LS Gabe rote alec Cisse) ahs ole,aiereh isms oc s } 0.25 | VC BY 0h it ES ee a eee ee 0. 25 5, O71
REINS Stee nctteia cians ae oc '0'sis 0.25 | SOON oe lama tete eta att tzu ate staves Sere 0, 25 15, 130
EL Bee CNS a Sane aaa | ONDDE AMOS EAS OIM esse este OS hE Sh 0.25 18, 398
| | me 95
IGG ARB aene C50. aan C de eee 0. 25 cial] Mine ah Sk a = ; 13, 874
TEG Ee a ois e ee Sae 0.25 2,147 || ae:
umes ee ee 0.25 9. ggg | 1883 -.--+-- esse renee ee eee ee 0.15 1, 058
OL at 0.95 Fe Ne rod eC ES ee Se 0. 25 4, 870
cy = 0.25 599 || 1885 .------------------------ 0. 25 | 18, 084
1872 As oust | I88Giges= 2-2 ease yap tee = 2 < 0.25 22, 083
Meo ates Sacto. Gee te ay Oee Wace: gat hg yo s eae
ip ee ee 0.25 1, 636 || 1888 ---------20------ 2222+. 25) 27, 665
y= Sic See ee 0:35 By eee ae ee eee 0.25 39, 031
SUSE AeA ete erp ern ee 0. 25 2.505 USOO LR trac eeee race cee ses cciank 0, 25 67, 620
Ve yitcansicis's sicicles sipisissin seis son 0. 25 2,183 CET URE Sere rere ae S| Sh amare 294, 577
POP yen tats 2 ee ote ee sie sie a) 5, 394 |

Let us look at this table for a moment. Nearly 500,000 vipers killed
during twenty-seven years in adepartment of France almost the exact
size of the State of Delaware (Haute-Saone, 2,028 square miles; Dela-
ware, 2,050 square miles)! Haute-Saone, in 1876, about the middle of
the period covered by the table, had a population of 304,052 souls ;
consequently there is said to have been killed in one generation one
viper for each human inhabitant! But let us analyze the table a little
closer.

We observe first that in the years of the Franco-German war and
those next following there was a great drop in the number of vipers
killed, for the people naturally had other things to attend to. We
also notice that when, in 1882, the authorities reduced the premium
from 25 centimes to 15 centimes per viper the people evidently lost
interest in the business, which must have become unprofitable, since
the number killed suddenly dropped from nearly 14,000, in 1882, to
a little more than 1,000, in 1883. The result evidently was that the
authorities became alarmed at the possible increase of the dreaded
reptile and again raised the premium to the old figure, undoubtedly to
the great satisfaction of the snake hunters and a corresponding deple-
tion of the county treasury. Furthermore, if we average the number
of snakes killed during the six years before the war we will find that
the annual average of vipers killed was 2,952, or nearly 3,000. The
corresponding figure for the six years following the excessive drop
caused by the war is 2,544, or somewhat less than the average of the
first six years. Two conclusions seem warranted by these figures,
first, that the average of these twelve years, viz, 2,748, represents the
normal number which a diligent search throughout the department
might yield; second that the decrease in the number of vipers killed
during the years 1870-1872 did not materially increase the number of

484 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

vipers during the period following, unless it might be assumed that
the premium had already effected a diminution of the vipers as early
as 1867, which is, of course, barely possible. We would now be pre-
pared for a constant decrease in the number of vipers killed yearly
from 1879 on, but on the contrary, in 1880 the figures jump to 15,000,
and with the exception of the years affected by the reduction of the
premium, the number of alleged vipers killed is steadily increasing,
until in 1880 it reaches the astounding number of 67,620!

At what rate must the vipers of Haute-Saone have been multiplying
since 1880! And this is what Prof. Kaufmann considers a successful
system.

The conclusion seems irresistible-that the functionaries paying the
bounty have either made false returns and pocketed the money, or else
that they have paid for every snake brought in whether poisonous or not.
The latter supposition would be the more disastrous one to the county,
because of the enormous number of useful species that must have
perished. One only wonders if a single snake is left in Haute-Saone,

But whichever of the two suppositions is the correct one, this case
corroborates only the experience which has been had everywhere that
bounties, as a rule, are failures where a nice discrimination has to be
made by the premium-paying functionary, and that it very often leads
to fraud both on the side of this official and on that of the bounty
hunter.

LIST OF BLLUSTRATIONS,

PLATES.

PuaTE 1.—Harlequin Snake, Llaps fulvius. From Baird, Report Mexican
Boundary Survey.
2.—Sonoran Coral Snake, Zlaps euryxanthus. From a specimen in the
U.S. National Museum,
3.—Copperhead, Agkistrodon contortriz. From a cast in the U. 8. Na-
tional Museum.
4,—Water Moccasin, Agkistrodon piscivorus. From a cast in the U.S.
National Museum.
5.—Massasauga, Sistrurus catenatus. From Holbrook, North American
Herpetology.
6.—Edwards’ Massasauga, Sistrurus catenatus Edwardsii. From Baird,
Report Mexican Boundary Survey.
7.—Ground Rattlesnake, Sistrurus miliarius. From a cast in the U.S.
National Museum.
8.—Dog-faced Rattlesnake, Crotalus molossus. From Hallowell, g@aci
fic Railroad Report.
9.—Banded Rattlesnake, Crotalus horridus. From a cast in the U.S.
National Museum.
10.—Diamond Rattlesnake, Crotalus adamanteus. From a cast in the
U. 8. National Museum.
11.—Texas Rattlesnake, Crotalus atrox. From Baird, Report Mexican
Boundary Survey.
12.—Prairie Rattlesnake, Crotalus confluentus. From Baird, Pacific
Railroad Report.
13.—Pacific Rattlesnake, Crotalus lucifer. From Baird, Pacific Rail-
road Report.
14.—Tiger Rattlesnake, Crotalus tigris. From Baird, Report Mexican
Boundary Survey.
15.—Horned Rattlesnake, Crotalus cerastes. From Baird, Report Mex-
ican Boundary Survey.
16.—Green Rattlesnake, Crotalus lepidus. From a specimen in the U.S.
National Museum.
17.—White Rattlesnake, Crotalus Mitchellti, From a speciuen in the
U.S. National Museum.
18.—Indian Cobra, Naja naia. After figure in Fayrer Thanatophidia of
India.
19.—West Indian ‘‘Fer-de-lance,” Bothrops lanceolatus. From a speci-
men in the U. 8. National Museum.

TEXT FIGURES.

Fig. 1.—Diagrammatic lateral view of the head of Tragops. After Niemann.
2.—Cross-section of the grooved fang of Tragops. After Niemann ......

Page.
350
350

486

Bic.

REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1893.

Page.

3.—Profile view of ekull of Mlaps:. Atter Sane 22 5. cles see ee eee) = ser 357
4.—Profile view of skull of Lampropeltis. After Jam....-..-...--...... 357
5.—Color pattern of Hlaps. Afters Jani s--- 212-5. ea cee eee eee 357
6.—Color pattern of Lampropeltis. After Jan-._.-. -298-- 2. --e-- secon 357
7.—Head of Elaps fulvius from above. From Baird-.---.-...---...-... 360
8.—Head of Llaps fulvius from the side. From Baird........-.-..----- 360
9.—Side of head of Rattlesnake, showing the pit...» -....-...---..--.- 364
10.—Piece of surface of epidermis lining the pit. From Leydig-...-.-..-..- 365
11.—Skull of Rattlesnake from above. After Jan -....-.--.---.-...---- 366
12;—Skull.of Rattlesnake fromisudle 2o22s5clscc ins cee ee ee ee eee 366
13.—Skull of Rattlesnake from below -..--.. eS ook: SES MOOS 366
14.—Osteology of poison apparatus of the Rattlesnake, After Mitchell. 367
15.—Muscles of poison apparatus of Rattlesnake. After Mitchell....--- 367

16.—Diagram of the bones concerned in raising the fang. After Mitchell. 368
17.—Arrangement of the reserve fangs in Bungarus semifasciatus, illus-
trating the development of the grooved fang into the canaled fang.

After Niemann a0. 2 22520 Sok. betes oa one hee ice ee ee 368
18.—Poison apparatus of Rattlesnake; venom gland and muscles. Lateral

Views, Adter DimVernoOy <c3 o2.2 2.5 3 nel Se re een ee cee 369
19.—Longitudinal section of poison fang of Bothrops. After Niemann... 370
20.——Transverse section Ofisame) ac... <2 oo. ee ele eee eee 370
21.—Diagram illustrating the succession of the fangs. After Mitchell.. 372
22.—Palate of Rattlesnake. After Duvernoy.......-.-----.------------ 377
23.—Perfect rattle of a large Banded Rattlesnake. Side view. After

Garman oes. Bala be MS eee a serene ae eye niet oS) Sn 381
24,.—Longitudinal section through same ._._......------------20---=-c-= 381
25.—Separate segments of a disjointed perfect rattle of a Crotalus. Side

view, After/Czermakis. joie aticc ones eee ee eee ee en aera 381
26.—Tail end of embryo of Massasauga. Side view. After Garman-----. 382
27.—Diagrammatic longitudinal section through same ..........-.--.--. 382
28.—Tail end of one-week-old Massasauga, Side view. After Garman.. 383
29.—Diagrammatic longitudinal section through same .........-.-.--.--. 383
30.—Incipient rattle of young Prairie Rattlesnake. Side view. After

Garman. .23 5226. 12 hc ee Side een esas ee ee eee 383
31.—Diagrammatic longitudinal section through same ..----.----.------ 383
32.—Tail end of the Copperhead. Side view. After Garman --.--....--- 392
33.—Under' side of tail of Water Moccasin 22-2. .2o25 2 s=se ee eee 400
34.—Under side of tail of Water Snake, Natrix ....-...----------------- 400
35:—Head of Copperhead from above. After Baird...-.-.--..---.-..---- 400
36.— Head of Copperhead trom) sid 6 tee asses ee ee eee 400
37.—Head of Spreading Adder (Heterodon) from above. After Baird .-.. 400
38.— Head of Spreading Adder from sider. ses eee = ee te 400
39.—Head of Water Snake (Natrix) from above. After Baird.....-.---- 400
AQ = Head) of Waterisnalce trom Side coeeetemicl sete a ole lel a) ete 400
41.—Head of Agkistrodon contortriz from above. After Baird ....--.-.--.- 403
42.—Head of Agkistrodon contortrix from side........---.---------------- 403
43.—Head of Agkistrodon piscivorus from above. After Baird....---..--- 407
44,—Head of Agkistrodon piscivorus from side ......----.---------------- 407
45.—Head of Sistrurus catenatus from the side, showing color pattern... 411
46.—Head of Sistrurus miliarius from side, showing color pattern ---- ---- 411
47.—Color pattern of top of head of Sistrurus catenatus -.--.------------ 411
48.—Color pattern of top of head of Sistrurus miliarius ...-------------- All

49.—Head of Sistrurus catenatus from above. After Baird...........---- 412

Se a ee oe

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. A87

Page

Fic. 50.—Head of Sistrurus catenatus from side. ...... .. --22 cece cw ccce concee 412
51.—Dorsal color pattern of Crotalus molossus....2.. 22.2. cecnee ence coee 422
o2.—Dorsal color pattern of Crotalus horridus.......2-.0----cceececocee. 422
53.—Dorsal color pattern of Crotalus confluentus.... 222.222. .220.- eeceee 422
54.—Dorsal color pattern of Crotalus lepidus ............-...2----.------ 422
ee etme OTOCL LUG TONE SYAQE Aes oso ci< conc 5s cas tvoeidn soa cBeenclee 423
ae een GroLsey Gtalts TOM IOM tees... 5. o.oo enn oes cs cee eee ccc 423
D(.--Lead of ‘Crotalus Mitchetlti from front......:-....222------.-ce--e- 423
58.—Color pattern of side of head of Crotalus adamanteus..........-.-.. 424
59.—Color pattern of side of head of Crotalus confluentus.........------- 424
60.—Color pattern of side of head of Crotalus lucifer..........-..-.--.-- 424
Bee iaoram Of low TOSstraless.- 2.22.2. osc seco oe ee Bio aah erat 424
Bor heag Of Crotalus lepidus Irom side@>5.... J.<2.- 222. sacs ccs cco oe eden 424
Pere MP EerO Palen COMoRAlne ate. 8522 aoe oe aeaecs soca Sooo c cede wo kz 424
64.—Head of Crotalus horridus from above. After Baird................ - A428
po. risador Crotalis horrwus from eide....<. =... --2-.--5.2 2. -2-- ee ne 428
66.—Head of Crotalus cerastes from above. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 482.._..- 451
Of; ead, of Crotalus cerastes from side. 1.2. 22. 2.222 boo. e oe 451
68.—Head of Crotalus lepidus trom side. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 21057... -- 453
69.—Head of Crotalus Mitchellii from above. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 12625.. 45!

5
f0;—- Head ot Crotalus Mitchellit from side. .----- 2.52.0. 6.2.2: 455

SAT

i
i
fe

i

ry

tf
dy 3 iM
LS

. Ki vi
‘\ oe

Oe

ti ig ee
ve ' ahis
5 roy pt 1
; n a Ty
4 ey a x ”
RE SES
pA ;
: -
i &
9
4
a
Rt writ ui y ai ul ;
eo y
he
a

as hy yi er ’ ‘ v4 i] va

rc ie erage

| inn ian iaay Nae vane

J EIBDRARTES OMITRSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I1YV Yh
re z i = re = i
= Oo : on Oo =m ro)
wo a wo = oa =
a 5 = = ran 5
> Ey > ra > rad
a i S i 2 -

m 2 i S Z m 2
ION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYSIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN

2) = n Zz wt: Y z

g 2 Z ogee te Z

= = = = NS a z

= ro) ei oe ge ae 5

= & Zz E he = Ee

> ; = > = - > = .
Lae 77) 4 ao - price * :
Ji7 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILONLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I1YVe

é s é mt el ani
a 2 ra z 4 ASS -
=4 < =i x =e Was <x
C c S c a ae
= rea] fea) = y oO
= = = -_ Pua ssi Me (
ION NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S3I¥VYUEIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITU
= ve = = gs é A
Oo — aa =e , %
te ws 5 o = GE. o
B 5 = = = = br >
> Fe — r che = : —
zZ D z ° Z : :
317 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I1YYY
te n” es w = ” f
< = < = < = Yj
yy = = = = _Z =
Ao OB 8S WS GE iB os
$f; ae oO fa “2 RANE) yoke [e)
= 2 = \\ z = =z
= : > = = SN >" = >
ON NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINWS S3IYVYEIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN
o ae Ht z iH 2
7) ,
Ps = a “ z Vy, 4
=< a _< a <x i A
o = io = om Ma =
= =z al Z er > f
A171 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVU
A ae ae S x = j
= S 2B E = 5
= 5 a =
> kK ; > - > =
ae 7p) a 2) = w
Oo z . D z o we
ION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I1NYVYEIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN
wo ras, wm (7S we’ w on
= < = ~< \S = <
a z a4 z \\ N =| =
2 6 S pal Be + (@) 4 \ SS : pa [@) :
wo a 77) D WS as tes 77)
(‘o| 4, a Oo *y 3 \. Oo i 4
Z = = E s 2 E
> ; = > . = : > =
See ; ” = 77) a See ”
di71_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLIWS
Zz a 2 w 2 wy
n =m 2” sia n =>
= a. a. oc = o
~
e = = Ve = x
oO es fe (@) _ oO =
= es 4 ay) z le |
1ON NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I1Y¥VYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN
z ie ow = eS = ~ By
NE o = 9 = GL: S
3) © > = > re GY
of F a a = -. de:

INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3Z1YVUd!l

h
N
L
N

LIBRARIES _ SMITHSONIAN

a)
= ik z =
= oO © a S
kK f Pt 4 am aw f= b> 9] j=
=e > =
EY . E a =
5 UP ; ~
: Ate 6 WE A A:
POLLNLILSNI NVINOSHIINS >> luvud Mul BRARI ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIO.
3 Z = 2 Ge = Z &.
z = a ON 3 2 WS
2 BY ERM 32 B RRS
? E a E WY is
Ss > " = ; > =
j 77) =z ” oh ” iz
LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLIWS S3IYVYRI
: = ie)
: ; i . S uw = WwW
a Re: a =
<} = < 4 <
ihe Cc a c oc
a = ie = =
) ~ ie oO - (@) —
: a! 2 ao z St Feat
NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IY¥YVYgIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIO
; Tit welt : ARO Obh
! oe = w = iY, a
&*) \\ S > 5 f Lf )
> XN q > 4 >
; w \ . SS ~ = 0 i= Vil p sd
: oH x =
: = Wr b ; 3° :
w ‘am = wn = wn

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31u¥Vvug!
+ Z

sw ” on” FZ n”
; = = < =
, = = = a
) = aa : oO =e
PSN 8 g ‘2 g
NS Zz = 2
ee = 3 =
NOILNLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIO:

Yin,

NOILMLILSNI
NOILNLILSNI
NOILNLILSNI

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S3I1uvUudl

SIIYVUGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN

INSTITUTION
INSTITUTION
INSTITUTION

)
NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYUEIT LIBRARIES

NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYaIT LIBRARIES

. 3 ae Me INSTITUTIO
? Z = ar ZS.

{ z = z NS =

4 (@) 5 5 (e} : SRY ‘ O \

} 72) n ” RW ” a

) O 5 re \. EF

: 3 2 E WY 5

4 = > = =

: 7) = 72) w

‘LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I1YWY dl

; w = ” = w”)
ws .o - a bs
: a. a oc = ox
1 <x 3; =< <x 4 <
: ae c oc c x
4 a a ao = a
) — ie) an fe) ce
q = = 8 z ¢ ag
| S3'1uYvVYgIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUTIO

¥ es “s Je = S Dp
D | rd <C> a Oo p y,

4 = E KAM) 5 2 Gy 0
4 > raat ja) > = Vy “UA>
- >] — te Jz) = 2A Vf Jf >

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIBRARIES

VIII

3 9088 00587 1835