﻿354 
  Mr. 
  0. 
  Thomas 
  on 
  

  

  Now, 
  as 
  the 
  name 
  antarcticus 
  has 
  to 
  be 
  fixed 
  on 
  one 
  or 
  

   otlier 
  of 
  the 
  two 
  forms 
  in 
  question, 
  I 
  propose 
  to 
  assign 
  it 
  

   definitely 
  to 
  the 
  smaller 
  one, 
  irrespective 
  of 
  locality. 
  My 
  

   reason 
  for 
  doing 
  this 
  is 
  that 
  the 
  original 
  description 
  * 
  " 
  was 
  

   taken 
  from 
  one 
  brought 
  to 
  England 
  when 
  we 
  possessed 
  those 
  

   Antarctic 
  spots/^ 
  and 
  as 
  the 
  chief 
  Englishman 
  who 
  had 
  been 
  

   about 
  that 
  period 
  to 
  the 
  Falklands 
  and 
  mentioned 
  the 
  

   animals, 
  Commodore 
  Byron, 
  stayed 
  for 
  the 
  greater 
  part 
  of 
  his 
  

   time 
  at 
  Port 
  Egmontf, 
  West 
  Falklands, 
  and 
  named 
  a 
  place 
  

   on 
  its 
  southern 
  shore 
  '' 
  Fox 
  Bay," 
  the 
  specimen 
  brought 
  to 
  

   England 
  was 
  very 
  probabl}' 
  from 
  that 
  island, 
  in 
  which 
  I 
  

   believe 
  the 
  smaller 
  species 
  to 
  occur. 
  No 
  certainty 
  is 
  possible, 
  

   but 
  this 
  seems 
  the 
  best 
  choice 
  to 
  make 
  in 
  the 
  circumstances. 
  

  

  That 
  the 
  larger 
  animal 
  was 
  a 
  native 
  of 
  the 
  Eastern 
  and 
  

   the 
  smaller 
  of 
  the 
  Western 
  Island 
  is 
  indicated, 
  firstly, 
  by 
  

   Darwin's 
  account, 
  and, 
  secondly, 
  by 
  the 
  localities 
  of 
  the 
  two 
  

   British 
  Museum 
  specimens 
  having 
  been 
  happily 
  recorded 
  by 
  

   Dr. 
  Gray 
  in 
  the 
  original 
  Museum 
  register 
  on 
  their 
  arrival. 
  

  

  Aijainst 
  this, 
  however, 
  is 
  to 
  be 
  set 
  the 
  fact 
  that 
  no. 
  636 
  of 
  

   the 
  College 
  of 
  Surgeons, 
  which 
  is 
  the 
  larger 
  form, 
  is 
  said 
  to 
  

   have 
  been 
  picked 
  up 
  on 
  West 
  Falkland, 
  as 
  recorded 
  by 
  

   Flower 
  in 
  the 
  Catalogue. 
  But 
  I 
  am 
  inclined 
  to 
  disbelieve 
  

   this, 
  in 
  the 
  face 
  of 
  the 
  other 
  evidence, 
  especially 
  as 
  the 
  words 
  

   "East^^ 
  and 
  "West" 
  are 
  suflSciently 
  alike 
  to 
  have 
  been 
  

   misread 
  at 
  some 
  stage 
  of 
  the 
  proceedings. 
  Mr. 
  Burne 
  has 
  

   been 
  good 
  enough 
  to 
  look 
  up 
  Flower's 
  letters 
  of 
  the 
  date, 
  but 
  

   can 
  only 
  find 
  his 
  original 
  entry 
  " 
  West^' 
  in 
  the 
  Catalogue. 
  

  

  Then 
  with 
  regard 
  to 
  sex. 
  It 
  mi2;ht 
  be 
  suggested 
  that 
  the 
  

   large 
  specimens 
  were 
  males 
  and 
  the 
  small 
  females 
  — 
  as 
  is, 
  

   indeed, 
  the 
  case 
  with 
  the 
  two 
  skins 
  available. 
  But, 
  apart 
  

   from 
  the 
  fact 
  that 
  the 
  difference 
  is 
  vastly 
  greater 
  than 
  the 
  

   sexual 
  difference 
  between 
  other 
  S. 
  -American 
  Canidse, 
  we 
  are 
  

   fortunately 
  able 
  to 
  determine, 
  with 
  fair 
  certainty, 
  the 
  sexes 
  of 
  

   the 
  skulls 
  from 
  the 
  sizes 
  of 
  the 
  canines. 
  According 
  to 
  my 
  

   sexing 
  on 
  these 
  lines, 
  as 
  indicated 
  in 
  the 
  table 
  of 
  measure- 
  

   ments 
  above, 
  two 
  of 
  the 
  smaller 
  skulls 
  are 
  those 
  of 
  males, 
  

   exceeding 
  the 
  known 
  female 
  by 
  about 
  the 
  same 
  degree 
  as 
  is 
  

   usual 
  in 
  the 
  group, 
  while 
  of 
  the 
  larger 
  form 
  R.C.S. 
  no. 
  636 
  

   appears 
  to 
  be 
  a 
  female. 
  If 
  this 
  be 
  correct, 
  we 
  thus 
  have 
  both 
  

   sexes 
  of 
  both 
  species 
  represented 
  in 
  the 
  series 
  available. 
  

  

  I 
  have 
  thought 
  it 
  suitable 
  to 
  attach 
  to 
  this 
  species 
  the 
  name 
  

  

  * 
  Pennant, 
  Q,uadr. 
  (1) 
  i. 
  p. 
  240 
  (1781). 
  On 
  this 
  description 
  tlie 
  name 
  

   antarcticus 
  was 
  given 
  in 
  1799 
  by 
  Bechstein 
  (Uebers. 
  vierf. 
  Tliiere, 
  i. 
  

   p. 
  271), 
  antedating 
  Shaw, 
  to 
  whom 
  the 
  name 
  is 
  generally 
  accredited, 
  by 
  

   one 
  year. 
  

  

  t 
  Ilawkesworth's 
  ' 
  Voyages,' 
  i. 
  p. 
  48 
  (1773). 
  

  

  