MUSEUM OF COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY. 



55 



Length of scapula . 



Breadth of " .... 



Greatest height of its spine . 



Length of humerus .... 

 Circumference of its head . 

 Least circumference of the humerus 

 Length of radius . 



" " ulna .... 

 Longest diameter of upper end of ulna 

 Length of carpus .... 

 " " metacarpus and 1st digit 



" 2d " 



" " " " 3d " 



« « « 4 t h '• 



" 5[h « 



" " femur 

 Circumference of neck 

 Length of tibia 

 " " fibula 

 " " tarsus 

 " " metatarsus and 1st iiigit 



" 2d " 



" " " " 3d " 



<< 4t h " 



" 5th " 



" " innominate bone 

 Greatest width of the pelvis anteriorly 

 Length of ilium .... 



" " ischio-pubic bones 



" " thyroid foramen 



" " os penis . 

 Width of hand at base of digits 



" " foot " " . 



£2 



830 

 350 



45 

 300 

 300 

 170 

 260 

 510 

 100 



80 

 350 

 310 

 240 

 200 

 170 

 170 

 125 

 320 

 310 

 140 

 310 

 290 

 290 

 305 

 227 

 320 

 140 

 140 

 140 



170 

 160 

 130 



© m 



370 

 380 

 52 

 285 

 290 

 180 

 SCO 

 310 

 130 

 80 

 360 

 320 

 250 

 2,050 

 1 ,850 

 220 

 ISO 

 340 

 330 

 160 

 270 

 290 

 270 

 285 

 310 

 360 

 160 

 160 

 200 

 200 

 170 



140 



The os penis (Fig. 13, Plate III) is 170 mm. long, slightly arched, 

 somewhat flattened above, especially posteriorly, sharply convex below, 

 and abruptly expanded and squarely truncate at the end. Its circumfer- 

 ence at the base is 72 mm.; just behind the terminal expansion, 32 mm.; 

 and the terminal expansion itself, G5 mm. 



The above table gives the principal measurements of the bones of 

 the skeleton. Measurements of both specimens are given, as in previous 

 tables, for the purpose of illustrating the variations that occur in the rela- 

 tive size of different parts after maturity is attained, and also for the pur- 

 pose of illustrating individual variation, which in some particulars these 

 specimens exhibit in a marked degree. The ribs, it will be observed, dif- 

 fer but slightly in total length in the two; not nearly so much as would be 

 expected from the much greater bulk of the body of the older specimen. 

 It will be noticed that the principal differences in the ribs consist in the 



