104 
trace of those remarkable glandular pouches which I originally dis- 
covered in a giraffe about two years old; in this, however, I have 
been agreeably surprised, and have found a structure still more com- 
plicated, although the secerning or follicular tissue is so little marked 
as to be scarcely visible to the naked eye (Pl. LXXVIII.)*. In 
Wombwell’s giraffe, which died at Edinburgh, only seven of the sacs 
were found complete and bordered by very attenuated walls; but in 
the Society’s specimen there are at least twenty circumscribed fossz. 
Ten of these exhibit very small outlets, whilst two or three of the 
larger and more patent sacculi display secondary pouches in their 
interior. As the drawing sufficiently illustrates the relative form 
and disposition of these sacs, it is scarcely necessary to describe them 
more fully ; but no one, I think, can possibly fail to recognize the 
morphological signification of this singular development in its en- 
tirety. Among the various known modes of extension of the intes- 
tinal glandular element, there is nothing comparable to it throughout 
the entire range of the vertebrate series. Special induplications of 
the alimentary membranes are here and there produced to meet the 
exigencies of certain mammalian species, but no one, I believe, has 
hitherto observed a similar development exclusively involving Peyer’s 
patches. It is now, therefore, even more perceivable that the com- 
pound agminated follicles may be legitimately associated with the 
highly developed compound lobulated glands, such as the sublinguals, 
the parotids, and the tonsils; and the latter, again, may be regarded 
as morphologically analogous, and even serially homologous with 
the highly organized liver and pancreas. In the Giraffe, indeed, the 
tonsils display a remarkably capacious excretory outlet common to 
all the lobules—a circumstance rendering the above comparison still 
more significant. 
There is also yet another aspect in which this honeycombed in- 
testinal gland is entitled to assume especial prominence, namely, as 
a zoological character. Here I am aware that I am likely to meet 
with opposition from those who ignore the value of anatomical 
investigations ; nevertheless, with all due deference to others, I must, 
in the present instance, be permitted to uphold the validity of the 
persuasion which argues that no viscus or system of tissues should 
be excluded from the characters employed in the determination of 
zoological affinity—certainly not, at least, when any marked devia- 
tion from a classic, ordinal, or generic type is sufficient to impart 
* It is remarkable that Prof. Owen should have entirely overlooked this 
peculiar formation, since nothing can be more precise and correct than his de- 
scription of the subjacent ilio-colic valve. In the Memoir, loc. cit. p. 227, he 
says :— The termination of the ilium forms a circular tumid lip within the 
cecum, and presents a less efficient mechanical obstacle to regurgitation than in 
the human subject.” 
Prof. Joly and Mons. Lavocat, although they have given a complete résumé of 
the writings and investigations of no less than forty eminent anatomists and 
zoologists, thus summarily dismiss their account of the cecum (Mem. J. c. p.35) : 
—‘ Le ceeum n’offre rien de particulier, si ce n’est son volume assez peu con- 
sidérable, quand on le compare a celui des autres ruminants, et surtout A celui 
du cheval.” 
