1861.] MR. R. F. TOMES ON THE GENUS MONOPHYLLTJS. 87 



upon this subject. The young of the rabbit are naked and blind ; 

 ■whilst those of the hare see, and have a hairy covering at birth ; the 

 number of young in the hare is from two to four, that of the rabbit 

 from four to seven (early in the spring I have generally found four) . 

 The rabbit burrows, takes down from its body, covers its young and 

 leaves them at night ; whilst the hare (English) seldom, unless hard 

 pressed, will go to earth. Without pointing out minor diiTerences, 

 I have said enough to lead some to suppose that my first impression 

 was correct, viz. that the cross between the hare and the rabbit was 

 a more extraordinary one than that between tlie ducks in question. 

 But a closer investigation leads me at once to acknowledge my error ; 

 for, looking especially to the comparative anatomy, and believing, as 

 I do, that time and circumstances may produce essential alterations 

 in the habits and in the external form, colour, and size of animals, 

 I think that there are more unstable and far-fetched theories in phy- 

 siology than the beUef tliat the hare and the rabbit may have beea 

 originally one and the same animal. 



March 12th, 1861. 



John Gould, Esq., F.R.S,, V.P., in the Chair. 



Dr. P. L. Sclater exhibited a very fine and perfect example of 

 Pentacrinus caput-medusce, which had been placed in his hands by 

 Lieut.-Col. P. C. Cavan, F.Z.S. This specimen had been dredged 

 up in CO fathoms' water on the coast of S. Lucia, West Indies, by 

 a fisherman, whose lines had become entangled in it. 



Dr. Crisp exhibited drawings of two fishes from a salt-water lagoon 

 near Cape Coast Castle, West Africa. 



The following papers were read : — 



1. On the Genus Monophyllus of Leach. 

 By Robert F, Tomes, Corr. Memb. 



(Plate XV.) 



Glompkaffa. Geoff. Mem. du Mus. t. 4. p. 41 1, 1818. JyH>U 



Monophyllus, Leach, Linn. Trans, xiii. p. 73, 1820. 

 Nicon, Gray?, P. Z. S. 1847, p. 1.5. 



Having recently examined a collection of Bats from Jamaica, col- 

 lected by the late Mr. Osburn, and containing several specimens of 

 a Leaf-nosed Bat which, on comparison with the mutilated type of 

 Leach's genus Monophyllus, proves to be identical with it, I have 

 thought that a more detailed description taken from these specimens 



