1883.] ORGANS OF THE INDIAN ELEPHANT. 519 



sideration no difficulty in identifying this portion of the sexual 

 canal. It was clearly recognizable externally from the uterus in front, 

 as well as from the urogenital canal behind, by tlie greater thinness of 

 its walls, while on opening it the cavity, which was of an oval form, 

 was seen to be larger than that of the uterus, from which it was 

 separated by a slightly puckered constriction which permitted the 

 passage of a finger. Posteriorly the secondary vagina communicated 

 with the urogenital canal by means of a single orifice which, smaller 

 than that leading into the uterus, permitted of the insertion of an 

 ordinary knitting-needle. This orifice was undefended by any valve. 

 The mucous membrane of the secondary vagina, moreover, diifered 

 in character from that of the uterus, inasmuch as in the latter 

 it was thrown into longitudinal plications, whereas in the secon- 

 dary vagina the mucous membrane was uniformly smooth and 

 devoid of rugfe. In all respects the secondary vagina of this speci- 

 men of the Indian Elephant agreed closely with the corresponding 

 portion of the female organs of the African species as described by 

 Perrault ' and Forbes ". By Perrault the secondary vagina is de- 

 scribed under the name of " corps ovale." 



The third point to be noticed in the anatomy of the specimen 

 under consideration was the total absence of a vaginal septum, 

 such as I found completely developed in that which I formerly 

 described in the Transactions of this Society. In that specimen the 

 uterine septum was complete, and extended from the junction of the 

 uterine cornua in front, backwards to the os uteri behind, whence it 

 was prolonged backwards along the whole length of the vagina to 

 the opening of the latter into the urogenital canal by means of a 

 well-developed septum vaginse. In the present specimen, on the 

 contrary, the septum uteri was incomplete, and there was a total 

 absence of the septum vaginae, which formed so exceptional a feature 

 in the anatomy of the specimen which I formerly examined. In this 

 respect the specimen under consideration agrees with every one of 

 those which have been previously examined by other anatomists 

 with the single exTception of that described by Messrs. Miall and 

 Greenwood, in Mhich the septum vaginse was represented only by a 

 fibrous cord, which, stretching across the aperture of communication 

 between the vagina and the urogenital canal, led those authors to 

 regard it as the representative of a hymen. 



With reference to the fourth point, the number of orifices which 

 communicate with the commencement of the urogenital canal, I 

 found that in the specimen under consideration there were four — 

 firstly, the orifice of the urethra, which was situated below that of 

 the secondary vagina ; secondly, the orifice of the secondary vagina 

 which was single, and was not divided into two separate apertures 

 by the posterior extremity of the vaginal septum, as was the case 

 in the specimen which I formerly described, and in that figured by 

 Messrs. Miall and Greenwood, in which that septum was reduced to 



^ ' Memoires pour servir a I'histoire naturelle des Animaux,' tome iii. p. 132 

 2 Proc. Zool. Soc. 1879, p. 431 



