124 PEOF. M. WATSON ON THE ANATOMY OF THE 



openings, neither of them hirger than a crow-quill ; the two lateral of these lead to two 

 small sacs (canals of Malpighi), which pass a little way along the sides of the com- 

 mon vagina. The urethra opens into the very beginning or fundus of the common 

 vagina. The middle orifice leads into the common vagina, which soon dilates." It 

 appears therefore that in Hunter's specimen the secondary vagina opened by a single 

 orifice into the urino-genital canal, whereas in mine this single orifice is replaced by two 

 ora vaginae separated by the vaginal septum. Otherwise Hunter's description of the 

 urino-genital canal agrees with my o\\t\. Ma)er ', again, describes the os uteri externum as 

 opening directly into the urino-genital canal, and does not mention a secondary vagina. He 

 does not describe the canals of Gaertner. The difference between Mayer's description 

 and that given aboye lies here — that whereas he found a unilocular uterus communi- 

 cating by a single orifice with the urino-genital canal, in my specimen the bilocular uteres 

 opens into the vagina, and this, again, communicates with the urino-genital canal by means 

 of two ora vaginse. Miall and Greenwood's description of these orifices agrees exactly 

 with my own, except that they do not refer to the canals of Gaertner. 



In the African Elephant Perrault' found four openings at the commencement of the 

 urino-genital canal — namely, those of the urethra, of the corpus uteri, and of the two 

 canals of Gaertner. The latter he does not describe, but figures in the central drawing 

 on plate xxi. Forbes " corroborates Perrault's description, but differs from him in the 

 interpretation of the parts, regarding the os uteri externum of Perrault as the opening 

 of the secondary vagina. This difference of interpretation depends upon the fact that 

 in Forbes's specimen, as already stated, the cornua uteri opened into a single corpus 

 uteri, which in turn communicated with a secondary vagina opening into the urino-genital 

 canal, whereas in Perrault's specimen the cornua uteri did not coalesce to form a corpus 

 uteri, but communicated by distinct orifices with the space which Forbes regards as the 

 secondary vagma. That Mr. Forbes is right in regarding the space in question as a 

 secondary vagina I have no doubt. Having myself examined the specimen, the fact 

 that the mucous membrane of this canal differs essentially in structure from that of both 

 the horns and body of the uterus, and that the space was separated from the latter by 

 a well-defined os uteri, at once convinced me that Mr. Forbes's view is the correct one. 



The only difference between the urino-genital canal of the Indian, as compared with 

 that of the African Elephant, lies in the fact that in the latter the urethra opens ujion 

 the cushion which occupies the centre of its blind extremity, whereas in the former the 

 urethral orifice is situated above that prominence. In the African Elephant there is 

 therefore a n«/-f7e-s«f above the projection referred to, which does not exist in the Indian 

 species, its place being occupied by the orifice of the urethra. 



Neither Hunter, Mayer, nor Owen* makes any reference to the presence of Cowperian 

 ducts in the female Indian Elephant. Miall and Greenwood ^, on the other hand, de- 



' Loc. cit. p. 38. - Loc. cit. p. 133. ' Loc. cit. p. 434. 



■* Anatomy and Physiology of Vertebrates, vol. iii. p. 692. ' Loc. cit. p. 65. 



