Dr. W. G. Ridewood on Hornless Ohapies. 387 



XLII. — Hornless Okapies. By W. G. RlDEWOOD. 



In the August number of the ' Annals and Magazine of 

 Natural History,' pp. 224-226, Mr. R. Lydekker endeavours 

 to show that hornless specimens of the Okapi are larger than 

 those with horns. Without venturing to express an opinion 

 one way or the other upon the question, I would point out 

 that the validity of the conclusions arrived at is weakened 

 by two incorrect statements which have a material bearing 

 upon the argument. 



On p. 225 the skull of the stuffed Okapi presented to the 

 British Museum by Major Powell-Cotton is stated to be 

 339 mm. in length. It is not mentioned how this measure- 

 ment is taken, whether to the front of the nasals or to the 

 front of the premaxilke, or otherwise. But at the foot of 

 the page the lengths of two other skulls are given, namely, 

 375 mm. as the length of a skull presented to the British 

 Museum by Sir Harry Johnston, and 377 mm. as the length 

 of a horned skull in the Tervueren Museum. These measure- 

 ments are quoted from Sir E. Ray Lankester's paper (Trans. 

 Zool. Soc. xvi. 6, 1902, p. 305), where the length is stated 

 to have been taken to the front of the nasal bones. One 

 concludes, therefore, that, since a comparison is being insti- 

 tuted between these three skulls, the length of the skull of 

 Major Powell-Cotton's specimen is measured to the front of 

 the nasals. The length as measured in this manner is 

 390 mm., not 339 mm. The skull is thus longer than the 

 skull of Sir Harry Johnston's specimen ; in other words, the 

 horned skull is longer than the hornless one. 



On p. 226 Mr. Lydekker writes concerning the Tervueren 

 skull above mentioned: — "I am informed by the Director 

 of the Tervueren Museum that the mounted skin of the 

 specimen to which the skull pertained is 145*5 cm. in height." 

 The skull in question is that of the skeleton numbered 483 

 in the late Monsieur J. Fraipont's monograph (' Annates du 

 Musee du Congo/ Zool. ser. 2, vol. i., Okapia, 1907). Ac- 

 cording to the list of specimens on page 14 of that work, and 

 according to the earlier statements by Dr. C. I. Forsyth 

 Major in the f Proceedings of the Zoological Society,' 1902, 

 ii. pp. 73 & 77, and 'La Belgique Coloniale,' Ann. viii. 45, 

 Nov. 9th, 1902, p. 533, the skin corresponding with that 

 skeleton was not sent to Europe ; the skin which arrived at 

 the same time as the skeleton (namely, skin no. 479, now iu 

 the Stockholm Museum) was from another and a younger 



26* 



