446 Miscellaneous. 



dible statement* that ^Ir. Theobald referred the two original speci- 

 mens of T. Phayrei in the catalogue above mentioned to two different 

 genera. " The perfect typical one" he confounded with the common 

 Testudo indica ; and the smaller carapace, wanting a few shields 

 and having no other bones, he referred to Manouria emys. This 

 specimen, being without the head, can give no authority for Mr. 

 Theobald's assertions about the skuU in the Museum. 



The paper contains no attempt to prove that the head of the per- 

 fect specimen is like the skull I described, much less to identify it 

 as being the same species ; and this is the first step that is wanting 

 to support their hypothesis. Indeed, unless we are to believe that 

 Mr. Theobald is a much more untrustworthy observer than I am 

 inclined to think, his having placed the imperfect specimen of Tes- 

 tudo Phayrei as a specimen, with a short broad-headed Tesfndo 

 indica goes far to disprove its being the same as the long narrow- 

 headed Scapia. 



The various statements on the minor points given about that spe- 

 cimen by Messrs. Blyth, Theobald, Blanford, and Anderson are so 

 conflicting, and sometimes absolutely contradictory, that one can 

 draw no conclusion from them. It is quite a mystery to me why Mr. 

 Blyth, Mr. Theobald, and their friends ai'e so anxious to prove their 

 improbable hypothesis, which would only throw discredit on the 

 two former. If I erred in considering the skull, which I had re- 

 ceived without habitat or history, to belong to a new species, I had 

 compared it with all the skuUs of the large tortoises I knew, and 

 belie\'ing, on the authority of Mr. Blyth and Mr. Theobald, that 

 Testudo Phayrei (which I had not) was the same as Manouria 

 (which I had, and which differed from the skull under examination), 

 I took all the proper precautions before describing it as new ; in- 

 deed, if I erred, I only did so in putting too much faith in my friends 

 and fellow-labourers. 



I . I did not suspect, and I do not now believe, that Dr. Falconer 

 had a skull in his possession that belonged to the Indian Museum, 

 knowing as I do that those he did borrow were returned by his 

 brother at his death. 2. I never suspected that Mr. Blyth, the paid 

 curator of the museum, would allow a skull to be removed from the 

 collection without informing the officers of the institution and taking 

 a receipt for it ; but the then secretary informed me that no ac- 

 knowledgment of the kind was to be found in any of their journals. 

 3. I did not suspect that Mr. Blyth did not know the species which 

 he had named Testudo Phayrei when he stated that JIanouria emys 

 was the same species. 4. I did not suspect that Mr. Theobald's 

 accuracy was not to be trusted when he placed the si^ecimcns and 

 bones of T. Phayrei in the Indian Museum under the name of 

 Manouria emys in the catalogue of the reptiles of that collection. 

 But it appears that I should have suspected and believed all these 

 circumstances, in order to escape making the mistake which I am 



* I see Mr. Theobald acknowledges this mistake, and refers it to ''cul- 

 pable haste " (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1870, p. G75). 



