175 



palate does not extend posteriorly beyond the lašt molar. In this 

 respect it resembles the genus Miniopteris, whilst in Vespertilio the 

 palate extends as far backwards as to the tniddle of the zygoma ; in 

 Vesp. (Kerivoula) pieta, nearly as far back as to the condyloid fossa. 



The lower jaw has, at the lowest part of the symphysis menti, a 

 prominent tubercle, directed downwards, and projecting below the 

 level of the lower margin of the jaw. It is probable that this may 

 be equivalent to the spince mentalas. From this, the margin of the 

 jaw curves very evenly and moderately to the posterior angle. The 

 ramus is very high, and the coranoid process, the condyle, and the 

 posterior process, are arranged in nearly the šame horizontai line, the 

 condyle being a little elevated above the other two. The posterior 

 process has a peculiar outward direction. 



Such are the characters derived from the examination of seven 

 examples. They do not include some peculiarities mentioned by 

 M. F. Cuvier, viz. the presence of a series of warts on the upper lip, 

 and under the chin, the prominence of the eye, and the cartilaginous 

 condition of the terminai half of the tail, I have failed to detect 

 any warts, nor do I perceive that the eye is more prominent than in 

 other Vespertilionidce. As, however, I am describing from dried 

 specimens, too great reliance cannot be placed on the apparent ab- 

 sence of these characters. 



With respect to the tail, in the seven examples examined, five^ve \ Cj ^i 

 it_jyholly withdravirn from the membrąne, and the remainmg two ' f"^^^^ 

 o nly pa rtialĮs, wįthdrawn, the terminai vertebrse being left in the 

 situation proper for tlie basai ones. This may possibly have been I 

 the case with the example mentioned by M. F. Cuvier, as suggested 1 

 by Dr. Gray. ' 



It may not be amiss to remark that this genus resembles the genus 

 Kerivoula of Dr. Gray (as illustrated by Kerivoula pieta) in the 

 form of the ear, but in no other respect have I found them similar. 

 The crania, although greatly elevated in both, differ in othet respects, 

 and even in this they by no means closely agree. 



The genus Miniopteris approaches most nearly to Furipterus, in 

 the characters exhibited by the cranium. They somewhat resemble 

 each other in the elevated form of the vertex, in the length of the 

 bony palate, and in some measure in the form of the posterior por- 

 tion of the lovyer jaw, and the development of the intermaxillary 

 bones. 



1. Furipterus horrens. 



Furia horrens, F. Cuv. Mem. du Mus. xvi. p. 150. tab. 9 ; Fischer, 

 Synop. Mam. Addenda, 352 ; Temm. Mon. ii. p. 264 ; Wagn. in 

 Suppl. Schreb.Sauge.i.p. 549 ; Schinz. Synop. Mam. i. p. 207; Less. 

 Nouv. Tab. Reg. Anim. p. 22. 



The eyes prominent and large. The nostrils apical, and separated 

 only by a margin surrounding them, forming a groove at their upper 

 part. Lips entire, the upper one with four or five warts along its 

 side. The lower lip has eight warts, conspicuous from being of a 



