90 TIIK ZOOLOGIST. 



[See also Couch, 'Cornish Fauna,' part i. p. 6, and Cocks, 'The 

 Naturalist,' vol. i. p. 37. — Ed.] For Devonshire, see Montagu, 

 Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. ix. p. 163, and Lord Lilford, in last 

 month's 'Zoologist' (p. 63). [See also Bellamy, 'Nat, Hist. 

 South Devon,' p. 193 ; Brooking Rowe, 'Cat. Mamm., &c., Devon,' 

 p. 3 ; W. Borrer, Zool. 1874, p. 4129 ; D'Urban, ' Handbook 

 S. Devon,' Append, p. xxvi. (1875); and Parfitt, 'Fauna of 

 Devon ' (1877), p. 17.— Ed.] 



Somerset is given as a habitat in Jenyns' 'Manual,' and the 

 venerable author has kindly vs^ritten, in answer to my inquiry, 

 that it is frequent in the neighbourhood of Bath, the specimens 

 in the Museum there having been taken in a stone-quarry 

 together with the larger species; and that "many years back" 

 he received others taken in churches in Bristol. The Rev. 

 M. A. Mathew also informs me that he has taken li. liipposideros 

 in a cave at Uphill, near Weston-super-Mare, "some years ago." 

 For Dorsetshire we have again the authority of Jenyns' ' Manual 

 of British Vertebrates ' (p. 20). 



In the Isle of Wight Mr. H. Rogers, of Freshwater, who 

 knows the larger species, and feels sure that he is not mistaken 

 in the identification, tells me that one specimen of R. hipjjosideros 

 was taken about twenty years ago at Niton ; but it must be 

 uncommon in the island (perhaps a recent immigrant ?), as it 

 was never discovered there by Mr. A. G. More, nor by any other 

 good observer who has lived there. [R.ferram-equinum, on the 

 other hand, is the commonest large Bat in the Undercliff; 

 cf. More in Venables' ' Guide to the Isle of Wight,' p. 409 ; and 

 W. Borrer, Zool. 1874, p. 4129.— Ed.] 



It was in Wiltshire that it was first discovered, by Montagu, 

 to be a British species. (Linn. Trans, ix. p. 163). 



[Worcestershire. — Dr. Hastings, in his ' Illustrations of the 

 Nat. Hist. Worcestershire ' (1834), includes (p. 62) "the large 

 Horse-shoe, Rhinoloplms ferrum-equinwin," but not the lesser 

 species. — Ed.] 



Gloucestershire and Warwickshire were added by Mr. Tomes 

 in the second edition of Bell's 'British Quadrupeds' (1874), 

 though it cannot be considered common in the latter county, 

 since Mr. Tomes mentions only two localities for it — Welford, 

 and Ragley near Alcester. In the former county it is stated to 

 be not rare at Cirencester. 



