THE CERVID.E. 67 



Smith and others, who place them in a separate genus — Bangi- 

 fer^ — for which I fail to find sufficient warrant. I confess I do 

 not sympathize with that disposition, which seeks to multiply 

 genera and species on slight distinctions^ as the presence or ab- 

 sence of canine teeth, or the female being provided with antlers or 

 not, as constituting a generic difference. Of the first, third, and 

 seventh species of which I treat, I do not speak from that careful 

 personal study of great numbers of living specimens, which I 

 could desire, and am obliged to depend to a large extent upon 

 information derived from the observations of others. Of the 

 others I am enabled to speak with assured confidence from per- 

 sonal observations of live specimens in my own grounds, where 

 1 could study them with the greatest care through a course of 

 years, and from hunting them in the wild state. 



It will be observed that in my list of species I have omitted 

 Cervus leucurus and Ccrvus Mexicanus. I do this because I find 

 them to be simply Cervus Virginianus, with scarcely sufiicient dis- 

 tinctive characteristics to entitle them to the rank of separate 

 varieties. When I come to treat of this species, I shall give my 

 reasons in full for writing Cervus leucurus and Cervus Mexicanus 

 out of the list of species of the American Deer. 



Naturalists disagree, and perhaps ever will, as to what diversity 

 shall be required to distinguish varieties, species, genera, orders, 

 etc. From the nature of the subject it may be impossible to lay 

 down a general rule by which even its author would in all cases 

 be able to place some particular specimen which might occasion- 

 ally be selected. 



Nor is it of the first importance that all should exactly agree 

 on this point. At least it is more important that we get all the 

 facts relating to a particular subject ; and then our disagreements 

 about names, although inconvenient, may not be of vital impor- 

 tance. I may, however, say, that at least before we can declare 

 a species as distinct from a variety, we must find distinctive char- 

 acteristics constant and uniform in every individual of the pro- 

 posed species, and wanting in every other individual of the same 

 genus, which characteristics should not be attributable to facti- 

 tious circumstances or local causes, as aliment, climate, altitude, 

 and the like, which at most should only be allowed to mark 

 varieties of the same species. Still we are liable to meet with 

 difficulties, which may only be removed, if at all, by long and 

 careful observation and study, which may enable us to determine 

 upon the thousand points of divergence or similitude which may 

 be manifested under a great variety of circumstances. 



