176 PELID 2. 
when the mouth was closed, conjecturally restored the 
lost canine by one haying the peculiar proportions of those 
previously referred to the Ursus cultridens. 
Dr. Kaup, on the other hand, in his excellent illustrations 
of the fossils from Epplesheim in the Darmstadt Collection, 
lays stress on the obvious differences which the falciform 
canines present, as compared with the known Bears and 
feline animals; pointing out, im his comparison of them 
with the latter, that the compressed canines had neither 
the grooves nor the two ridges which characterize the 
canines in the genus /e/is, and that no carnivorous quad- 
ruped had the enamelled crown of the canine so long, or 
its concave edge so serrated. The Darmstadt Professor 
dwells on the resemblance in these respects between the 
falciform canines in question, and the teeth of the Megalo- 
saurus; and concludes by proposing to form a distinct 
genus, Machairodus, for the extinct species to which these 
singular teeth belonged.* 
The author of the article Machairodus in the Penny 
Cyclopedia has cited my reasons for rejecting the idea of the 
Saurian nature of that genus; the proof of its belonging 
to the Mammalian class being afforded by the specimen 
figured at 6, p. 244, vol. xiv. of that valuable work, “ which 
shews that the tooth was originally lodged in a socket, and 
not anchylosed to the substance of the jaw, and that the 
fang was contracted and solidified by the progressive 
diminution of a temporary formative pulp, and did not 
terminate in an open conical cavity, like the teeth of all 
known Saurians, which are lodged in sockets.” The 
article concludes by the remark, that ‘‘ we are not without 
existing Ruminants with very long canine teeth in the 
upper jaw, with serrations on their edges, though not so 
* Description d’Ossem. Foss. de Darmstadt, 4to. 2de cahier, p. 28. 
