66 BEPORT—1842. 



and stronger, where it bounds the olecranal cavity, and it extends inwards to 

 a greater distance from the articular surface ; the deltoidal ridge reaches 

 lower down in the White Bear ; the antero-posterior diameter of the proxi- 

 mal third part of the bone 1 of the White Bear exceeds in a marked degree 

 that of the extinct species. 



The decease of Hunter took place before the printing of his observations 

 on the fossil cave-bones, and the individual to whom the task of superin- 

 tending the printing was entrusted, described both the figures of the humeri 

 in the Plate, as belonging to the fossil species. Cuvier, who did not perceive 

 the resemblance of the upper figure to the humerus of the White Bear, and 

 who therefore did not recognise the mistake, avails himself of it to illustrate 

 his opinions respecting the specific distinction of his Ursi spelceus et Arc- 

 toideus. 



Cuvier, in fact, possessed a humerus of one of the great Cave Bears, the 

 internal condyle of which was perforated, as in the feline tribe, whilst other 

 humeri were imperforate, and corresponded with the lower figure in Hunter's 

 plate. But the perforated fossil humerus figured by Cuvier differs from that 

 of the White Bear in the shorter deltoid ridge, the narrower proximal and 

 distal extremities, the convex outline of the supinator ridge, and the inferior 

 production of the inner condyle ; in short in all those characters by which the 

 imperforate fossil humerus has been shown above to differ from that of the 

 White Bear. Not any of the three fossil humeri in the Hunterian Collec- 

 tion have the perforation of the internal condyle ; and amongst the ex- 

 tremely numerous humeri that have since been obtained from the bone- 

 caves of Germany, not any have been found to present the perforation which 

 Cuvier regards as the specific character of this bone in the Ursus spelceus ; it 

 is most probably therefore, as Professor de Blainville conjectures, an acci- 

 dental anomaly. But the differential characters which both the imperforate 

 and perforate humeri of the great Cave Bear present, when compared with 

 those of any recent species, cannot be reconciled by the hypothesis that these 

 are merely degenerated descendants of the Ursus spelceus. 



The humerus from Kent's Hole presents all the characters of that of the 

 Ursus spelceus above described. 



Ulna. — The ulna of the Cave Bear ( Ursus spelceus), compared with one 

 of the same length from the Polar Bear, is less straight, being more convex 

 towards the radius ; is thicker, particularly at the anterior part of the shaft ; 

 the ridge on the outside of the distal end of the bone is more produced ; the 

 styloid process is more pointed ; and the concavity on the inner side of the 

 proximal articular surface is deeper. 



The ulna from Kent's Hole agrees with that of the Ursus spelceus from the 

 German caves. 



The difference between the femur of the Ursuc spelceus and the femur of Ur- 

 sus arctos or ferox, is analogous to that which has been pointed out in the hu- 

 meri ; the femur of the Grisly Bear being broader in proportion to its length, 

 especially at its two extremities : it is owing to this breadth that the lesser tro- 

 chanter is thrown wholly to the posterior surface of the bone, the inner mar- 

 gin being continued beyond it, whilst in the Cave Bear the lesser trochanter, 

 though on the posterior surface of the bone, projects a little beyond the inner 

 margin. At the distal end of the bone the tuberosity above the internal 

 condyle, corresponding with that in the humerus, is larger and more promi- 

 nent in the Grisly than in the Cave Bear ; the same difference in the position 

 of the lesser trochanter is presented by the White Bear as compared with 

 the Cave Bear, and the extremities of the bone are relatively broader. 



I have not been able to detect any other well-marked modification of form 



