358 Mr. J. Hogg on the Existence of 



previous classification, which is, to separate the Toads from 

 the Frogs {Ranidee), and to place them, as Prof. Bell has done, 

 in another family, Biifonida* ', one of the chief distinctions of 

 the latter being the absence of teeth. 



Next, the late discovery of a very remarkable and anoma- 

 lous animal renders an extension of my proposed classification 

 very necessary ; — the animal which I mean is what Fitzingerf 

 and NattererJ denominate " Lepidosiren," and consider as 

 forming a new genus of the fish-like Amphibians, whilst Prof. 

 Owen § regards it, with another species, as being more nearly 

 allied to the Fishes. And I may remark that the L. paradoxa, 

 a native of the marshes near the Amazon, in South America, 

 where it is named Caramuru, is extremely like the Siren in 

 general character and form ; whilst the L. annectens, which 

 inhabits the river Gambia in Africa, more resembles in its 

 shape the Siredon pisciformis, or Axolotl of Mexico. It is also 

 used for food by the inhabitants of that part of Africa, as the 

 Axolotl frequently is by the Mexicans. 



Now the presence of distinct lungs in both these animals 

 makes me at once dissent from the opinion of the latter author, 

 and decides with me the question — whether they are to be 

 esteemed as true Amphibians, or true Fishes} 



Yet Prof. Owen has resolved this question in favour of their 

 being Fishes, principally from their tiose ; which consists of 

 two membi'anous sacs, plicated within, opening externally on 

 the upper lip, but (according to his observation) without com- 

 municating with the fauces or mouth ||. The other ichthyic 



* History of British Re})tiles, p. 105.- 



f Froriep's Notizen, vol. i. p. 90 ; and Wiegmaun's Arcliiv, 18.37, p. 

 232. 



X Lepidosiren paradoxa, eine iieue Gattung, aiis der Faniilie der Fisch- 

 iihnlichen Reptilien, von Johann Natterer, Annalen des Wiener Museums 

 der Naturgeschichte, 1837, vol. ii. p. 1C5. 



§ Description of the Lepidosiren annectens, Linn. Trans., vol. xviii. 

 p. 327. 



II M. Milne Edwards, in his paper ' On the Natural Affinities of the Lepi- 

 dosh-en' in the Ann. des Sci. Nat. for September 1840, writes as follows : — 

 " One of the reasons upon which Mr. Owen most insists for placing the Le- 

 jndosiren amongst fish, is the want of communication between the nasal ca- 

 vity and the mouth ; but M. Bischoif asserts, that in the species which ho 

 dissected there exist hinder-nostrils {arriere-narines) opening into the cavity 

 of the mouth near to the commissure of the lips. I also saw these posterior 

 openings of the nasal cavity in the L. paradoxa dissected by M. Bibron, and 

 their abnormal position appears to be in part explained by the absence of 

 superior maxillary bones." This paper, a translation of which was given 

 in the 'Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist.' for February 1841, p. 467, I had not 

 seen until some time after mine was written and in the editors' hands. I 

 must here point out that Mr. Owen made his dissection of the L. annectens, 

 while MM. Bischoffand Bibron examined the L. paradoxa. 



