NATURAL HISTORY OF THE DOG. 83 



natives call them bush-dogs, or dogs of the woods, and assert 

 that they are only tame dogs run wild. 



The wild dog most common in South America is a small, 

 short-legged, stout, fox-like animal, but somewhat larger than 

 the fox. It is often hunted for its skin, and such of its 

 bn-thren as may have been partially reclaimed by the natives, 

 make no scruple of joining in the chase. These dogs are very 

 silent, and are great rogues. They appear, indeed, to thieve 

 from a pure and innate propensity to thievery, for they will 

 steal and hide articles for which they can have no possible 

 use. 



THE DEEB OF EGYPT. 



Principally inhabiting Nubia and Abyssinia the Thous 

 Anthusof H. Smith ears erect, muzzle not sharpened at the 

 point, lips semi-pendulous, tail short and hairy, color, a mix- 

 ture of dirty white, black, and buff, producing a series of 

 small black spots, caused by the union of the tips of the longer 

 hairs. This dog has likewise been, by some naturalists, re- 

 garded as the origin of our domestic dogs ; and it is certainly 

 of very ancient origin, as has been proved by heads of dogs 

 taken from the catacombs, which evidently belong to a similar 

 variety. 



Of the habits of the Deeb I have not been able to obtain 

 any very satisfactory information, excepting that it appears 

 more cowardly than wild dogs usually are, and that it is easily 

 tamed, when it becomes very affectionate. Its height is about 

 eighteen inches. 



We now arrive at the main subject of this volume 



THE DOMESTIC DOG. 



Even when taken in detail, the anatomy of the domestic dog 

 can, perhaps, scarcely be said to differ materially from that 

 of the wolf or the wild dogs, the points in which any dis- 

 crepancy exists not being sufficiently striking to catch any 

 but an experienced eye. Such discrepancies, however, do 

 exist, and when combined with other and important physio- 

 logical facts, are sufficient to establish the non-identity of the 

 canine and lupine families. I have, however, noticed some 

 of these discrepancies already, and it is unnecessary to re- 

 capitulate them here. 



The dog belongs to the MAMMALIA, or animals possessing 

 teats for the nourishment of their young ; to the CARNIVOBA, 



