32 REPORT ON ZOOLOGY, MDCCCXLIII. 



Univ. d'Hist. Nat. iii, p. 106, the Reporter can only express the same 

 opinion as on that of the genus Canis. The fossil species have, as usual, 

 been briefly mentioned by Laurillard. 



Valuable contributions to a more accurate knowledge of 

 the Felina have been made by Is. Geoffroy in Jacquemont's 

 Voyage dans 1'Inde. (46 and 47 livraison, 1843. Mammif. 



p. 34.) 



He admits four genera : (1) Cynailurits. Claws not retractile. (2) Felix. 

 Claws as in the Tiger, but the pupils narrowly contracted in the light. The 

 palate bones do not present, as in the latter, the much expanded and con- 

 stant elongation, behind the molar teeth. The incisors are placed in a 

 straight line, and the outer ones but little developed. The canines are more 

 or less flattened on the internal surface, and are never, especially in the 

 upper jaw, thick and conical as in the Tiger. (3) Lynx. Ears elongated, nar- 

 row and tufted ; tail very short, only three molars above, whilst the first 

 intermediate tooth is wanting. (Is. Geoffroy, however, himself remarks that 

 it is present originally, but is shed early). It must be confessed, however, 

 that the characters derived as well from the dentition as from the external 

 appearance, are only of slight significance in this genus ; that is to say, in 

 other words, it is not tenable as a genus, which is also true of the other 

 three. (4) Tigris. Claws retractile, pupils round, four molars above. To 

 this belong Felts, Jard., Leo, Leach, and Puma, Jard. 



Is. Geoffroy remarks (p. 45), that Guldenstradt's Fells Chaus is identical 

 with the Egyptian species described by his father and Er. Cuvicr, and that 

 the length of the tail presents in both the same proportion to that of the 

 body. 



Fells caligula, Temm., and F. caffra ) Desm., are separated 

 by Is. Geoffroy (p. 49) as two distinct species. 



He says that Temminck here places erroneously the " Lynx botte" of 

 Bruce and the F. caff r a of Desmarest ; otherwise his description, which includes 

 scarcely any elements borrowed from later writers, might be regarded as a good 

 description of F. caligata, which has hitherto been found only in India. He 

 distinguishes this F. caligata from F. Chaus principally by the colour of the 

 ears and tail. In F. Chaws, for instance, one part of the ear is of a reddish- 

 brown, whilst in F. calirjata the whole of the outside is red, except the short, 

 black, tuft-like tip. The tail, moreover, in the latter is longer, with three 

 or four rings, of which the two latter are complete ; F. Cham has two rings. 

 Is. Geoff, distinguishes F. caffra from F. caUgata thus : (1) The posterior 

 surface, not only of the feet, but also in part of the leg and a part of the outer 

 side of the forearm is black (in F. caUcjata the under side of the feet only, is 



