THE LEOPARD. 75 



cal opposite uses of the terms Leopard and Panther, which 

 may be epitomised as follows : — 



Temminck. 



African form Panther 



Smaller Indian form ... Panther 



Larger Indian form ... Leopard 



Now it is admitted on all hands that the larger and smaller 

 Indian forms are very close indeed to one another, Mr. Blan- 

 ford observing that he finds it frequently impossible to " de- 

 termine to which of the two supposed forms an Indian skin 

 should be referred." On the other hand, an African skin is, 

 as a rule, distinguished by the spots being very much smaller, 

 and many of them without light centres. 



This being so, it may be submitted that if the two Indian 

 forms are regarded as distinct, the African animal is at least 

 equally entitled to distinction. This being admitted, as well 

 as the right of the latter to the title of Panther, it follows that 

 if we take (as appears probably right) the term Leopard as ap- 

 plicable to the larger Indian form, the smaller Indian animal 

 has no name at all ! 



It is far from our intention to further complicate matters by 

 proposing any new name, or, indeed, for that matter, deciding 

 as to the proper application of the terms Leopard and Panther; 

 our object being merely to show the different senses in which 

 they are commonly used. 



We may accordingly pass on to the question as to whether 

 there is really any specific distinction between any or all of the 

 animals above-mentioned. The late Mr. Blyth seems to have 

 been the first of modern naturalists to come to the conclusion 

 that all of them formed but a single species. He was followed, 

 in a somewhat half-hearted way, by Jerdon, and this half- 

 heartedness is even more conspicuous in Mr. Saunderson's 

 book, wherein, while the two Indian forms are spoken of as 



