94 URSID &. 
to a greater distance from the articular surface; the del- 
toidal ridge reaches lower down in the White Bear; the 
antero-posterior diameter of the proximal third part of the 
bone 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 superintending the printing was en- 
trusted, 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 Ursus 
speleus and U. arctoideus. 
Cuvier, in fact, possessed a fossil 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 supimator 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 Collection have the perfora- 
tion of the internal condyle; and amongst the extremely 
numerous humeri of large Bears that have simce 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 speleus ; 
