23 



February 28th, 1837. 

 The Rev. John Barlow, in the Chair. 



Tlie following notice by T. C. Eyton, Esq. of some osteological pe- 

 culiarities in different skeletons of the genus Sus was read. 



" Having during the last year prepared the skeleton of a male Pig 

 of the pure Chinese breed, brought over by Lord Northampton, I 

 was surprised to find that a very great difference existed in the 

 number of the vertebrae from that given in the "Lemons d'Anatomie 

 Comparee," vol. i. Ed. 1835. pag. 182, under the head either of San- 

 glier or Cochon Domestique. A short time afterwards, through the 

 kindness of Sir Rowland Hill, Bart., M.P., I prepared the skeleton 

 of a female Pig from Africa ; this also differed, as also does the En- 

 glish long-legged sort as it is commonly called. 



" The following table will show the differences in the number of 

 the vertebrae in each skeleton with those given in the work above 

 quoted. 



It is possible that some of the caudal vertebrae may be missing. 



" The Chinese Pig was imported into this country for the purpose 

 of improving our native sorts, with which it breeds freely, and the 

 offspring are again fruitful. I this winter saw a fine litter of Pigs 

 by Sir Rowland Hill's African Boar, imported with the female I de- 

 scribed, the mother of which was a common Pig ; time will show 

 whether they will again be fruitful. 



" From what has been stated the result appears to me to be that 

 either the above three Pigs must be considered as distinct species, and 

 which, should the offspring of the two latter again produce young, 

 would do away with the theory of Hunter, that the young of two di- 

 stinct species are not fruitful, or we cannot consider osteological 

 character a criterion of species. 



" I have been induced to offer the above not with any desire of 

 species- making, but of adding something towards the number of re- 

 corded facts by which the question what is a species must be an- 

 swered." 



