Cope.] ^'- April 18, 



Restoration. The following dimensions may be relied on as a basis for 

 a restoration of this species : 



M. 



(head 0.220 



T ,, ] vertebral column less tail 1.063 



Length \ 



[equal 42.1 inches 1.283 



r of neural spines exposed 035 



Height 



of scapula 215 



of fore leg 697 



[ Total 31.05 inclusive "947 



fof hind leg 770 



tt • i i. of elevation of ilium 135 



Height j 



I Total 29.7 inches 905 



Depth of body at middle manubrium 255 



" at 15th rib 250 



Allowance being made for the obliquity of the humerus, scapula, femur 



and ilium, the elevation in life was, 



M. 



At the withers (26.6 inch) 872 



" rump 762 



The size of this species was then that of a large sheep. 



Comparison of the skeleton with that of Tapirus roulini. For the 

 opportunity of making this comparison I am indebted to the Smithsonian 

 Institution, which possesses a skeleton of the above species of tapir from 

 Equador, presented by President Moreno. 



Cranium. In addition to the generic characters mentioned at the com- 

 mencement of this description, the //. eximius and T. roulini, differ as 

 follows : in II. eximius there is (1) a high sagittal crest winch is wanting 

 in T. roulini, T. malayanus, and approximated in T. terrestris. (2) The 

 crest of tht squamosal part of the zygoma is continuous with the lateral 

 occipital crest, which is not the case in existing tapirs. 



Vertebra-. (1) The arterial canal of the atlas is nut isolated in front as 

 in T. roulini, but notches the basis of transverse process. (2) The axis 

 is longer than in T. roulini. (3) The neural spines and especially the 

 metapophysesof the posterior dorsal vertebrae are more elevated. (4) The 

 ends of the centra of the lumbars are flatter, and more depressed. (5) The 

 diapophyses are wider and longer and thinner and the penultimate articu- 

 ates with the last by an angular process, which is not the case in T. 

 roulini. 



Scapula. (1) This bone is equal in size to that of a T. roulini of con- 

 siderably greater general dimensions, and is hence relatively larger. 

 (2) The spine is not angulate as in that species, has a longer base, and 

 longer elevated margin. (3) The neck is more contracted and (4) the 

 coracoid is not recurved as in T. roulini. (5) The sinus bounded below 



