Eris: 165 
the skeleton of a tiger which was considered one of the largest known, 
the cranial measurement of whose skull is 14°50 inches, but the 
Maharajah of Cooch Behar showed me one of his skulls which exceeded 
it, being 15 inches. Amongst others I wrote to Mr. J. Shillingford 
of Purneah, and he most kindly not only drew up for me a tabular 
statement of the dimensions of the finest skulls out of his magnificent 
collection, but sent down two for my inspection. Now in the long- 
waged war of opinion regarding the size of tigers I have always kept a 
reserved attitude, for if I have never myself killed, or have seen killed 
by others, a tiger exceeding ten feet, I felt that to be no reason for doubt- 
ing the existence of tigers of eleven feet in length vouched for by men ot 
equal and in some cases greater experience, although at the same time 
I did not approve of a system of measurement which left so much to 
conjecture. 
There is much to be said on both sides, and, as much yet remains to 
be investigated, it is to be hoped that the search after the truth will be 
carried on in a judicial spirit. I have hitherto been ranged on the side 
of the moderate party; still I was bound to respect the opinion of Sir 
Joseph Fayrer, who, as not only as a sportsman but as an anatomist, 
was entitled to attention ; and from my long personal acquaintance I 
should implicitly accept any statement made by him. Dr. Jerdon, 
whom I knew intimately, was not, I may safely assert, a great tiger 
shikari, and he based his opinion on evidence and with great 
caution. Mr. J. Shillingford, from whom I have received the greatest 
assistance in my recent investigations, and who-has furnished me with 
much valuable information, is on the other hand the strenuous 
assertor of the existence of the eleven-foot tiger, and with the magnifi- 
cent skulls before me, which he has sent down from Purneah, I cannot 
any longer doubt the size of the Bengal tiger, and that the animals to 
which they belonged were eleven feet, szeasured sportsman fashion—that 
_ is round the curves. The larger of the two skulls measures 15:25 inches 
taken between two squares, placed one at each end ; a tape taken from 
the edge of the premaxillaries over the curve of the head gives 17°37 
inches ; the width across the zygomatic arches, 10°50.* ‘The palatal 
measurement, which is the test I proposed for ascertaining the length 
of the skeleton, is 12°25, which would give 5 feet 7°37 inches; about 
3% inches larger than the big skeleton in the Museum. This may seem 
very small for the body of an animal which is supposed to measure eleven 
feet, but I must remind my readers that the bones of the biggest tiger 
look very small when denuded of the muscles ; and the present difficulty 
I have to contend with is how to strike the average rate for the allow- 
ance to be added to skeleton for muscles, the chief stumbling block 
being the system which has hitherto included the tail in the measurement. 
If all tigers had been measured as most other animals (except felines) 
* At Mr, Shillingford’s request, I made over this skull to the Calcutta Museum. 
