fg^J; SOME NEW BOOKS. 625 



structure, habits, and distribution of the same animals, some of these 

 observations being of the most starthng nature. 



With the present abundance of books on Natural History, and 

 especially on mammals, we should have thought it would be possible 

 for any writer who has no special knowledge of systematic zoology to 

 ^ive a fairly creditable account of the leading features of the animals 

 he notices. Mr. Poland seems, however, to have carefully avoided 

 reading all the more important recent works on mammals, and derives 

 .a considerable amount of such information as he possesses from the 

 somewhat antiquated works of the Rev. J. G. Wood. 



We notice, in the first place, that the author has a total lack of 

 literary style, his sentences being short, disconnected, uncouth, and 

 in some cases ungrammatical ; while many of his remarks appear 

 decidedly naive. As an instance of grammar, we may quote the 

 following sentence from page 304, where we read (the italics being our 

 own) that " A few skins of the Harnessed Antelope are imported with 

 monkey skins, and they are principally used for leather^ although it 

 would make up well for fur." 



Not less glaring is the author's careless proof-reading of the 

 scientific names of the various animals of which he treats — a matter 

 which should have received the utmost attention in a work largely 

 intended for readers who are not zoologists. As instances of this 

 slipshod carelessness, we select the following, viz.: — (p. 11) Sevnio- 

 pitliecns scliistauiis, for schistacens ; (p. 31) Felis geoffroy, instead of 

 geoffvoyi ; {p. ^2) F. passenivi, for pajeros : (p. ^^) Cynattiins, in lieu of 

 Cyiurlunis ; and (p. 59) Nandinia binstata, for binotata. Again, on p. 306, 

 we have Kerwas, instead of Keiiias, for the Tibetan Chiru Antelope, 

 of v,-hich, by the way, the proper name is PantJwlops. 



With regard to the errors in zoology, the following are some of the 

 most glaring. Thus on page 13 we find the astounding statement 

 that all the Lemurs are confined to Madagascar ; while on page 113 

 we are surprised to learn that in Northern India an " American 

 species, the Racoon, is found." We presume the latter statement 

 has originated from the name " Himalayan Racoon " having been 

 applied to the Panda (yElnrus fiilgens) ; but on turning to pp. 155,156, 

 we find the author in hopeless confusion on this subject. We have, 

 indeed, the Panda recorded on the latter of these pages under its 

 proper title, without any reference to its affinity with the Racoons. 

 On the preceding page we have, however, an animal mentioned 

 under the name of the " Cashmere Racoon," with the sapient remark 

 that " this extremely rare animal inhabits Cashmere, and the extrem.e 

 North of India" ; and it is added that "the head is ringed like the 

 American Racoon." In the latter remark, the author makes the 

 tritiing error of writing head instead of tail; and, as a matter of fact, 

 the animal to which he refers must be the Panda itself, which, by the 

 way, is totally unknown in Kashmir, or anywhere else in the 

 North-west Himalaya. 



The author is almost equally at sea with regard to the Civets, 

 which he appears to consider merely as " cats," since he commonly 

 speaks of them by that name. First of all he alludes to the common 

 Indian Civet {Vivcrra zihetha) under the title of the " Chinese Bush, or 

 Civet Cat," and states that it is an inhabitant of China and Nepal, and 

 is probably merely a variety of the African Civet {V. civetta). Subse- 

 quently, it is added that " a local varfety is the Indian Civet Vivcnicida 

 vialaccensis.'' Now if the author had taken the trouble to consult 

 Jerdan's or Blanford's works on the Mammals of India, he would have 

 found that V. zihetha is to the full as distinctively an Indian as a 



2S 



