125 



in. tin. 



Length of the head and hodv 2 6 



of the tail ' 2 5 



of the head I0J 



of the ears I 



of the tragus 2| 



of the fore-arm '_' 1 



of the longest finger 1 .1 



of the fourth finger 2 '> 



of the thumb u 



— of the tibia 10 



of the foot and claws 5X 



Expanse of wings 15 6 "or 16" in.* 



4. M. A.USTRAL.I8, n. s. 



This species differs from M. blepotis in having the face more 

 hairy, the ears relatively smaller, and the thumb much smaller, and 

 in being itself much smaller. The fur too of the under parts en- 

 croaches somewhat on the membranes, whilst in M. blepotia they 

 are quite free from fur. 



M. Temminek, speaking of the latter species, says, "La femelle 

 n'a guere plus de 3 pouces 4 lignes (of length) ; envergure a-peu- 

 pres 10 pouces ; antibrachium 1 pouce 6 lignes; " which statement 

 of dimensions appears to apply with moderate accuracy to the pre- 

 sent species. It is not, however, the female of M. blepotis, as I 

 have examined specimens of both sexes, adult and immature ; and 

 if neither age nor sex will explain the great difference in size, it must 

 be regarded as a very remarkable variety or as a distinct species. 

 The fact of its occurrence over a very considerable range of count rv 

 — the Indian islands and Australia — inhabiting alike island and con- 

 tinent without manifesting any difference in appearance, is very 

 strong evidence against its being a mere variety, and in my opinion 

 fullv establishes it as a distinct species. 



The general colour of the fur is very similar to that of M. blepotis; 

 but the generality of specimens have a more decided rafbus tinge, 

 which is given by the tips of the hairs being paler and redder than 

 at the base. But this is not perceivable in some individuals, and 

 thus they are of the ordinary sombre colour of the Australian ex- 

 amples of M. blepotis. 



In the following Table of Dimensions, columns 1 and 2 refer to 



* It will be observed, tliat tbe dimensions I have given differ ■ little from 

 given by Mr. Waterhoiise, both taken from th< iinen. But tin- dirler- 



ence is very trilling in all respects save in tbe expanse of tbe wings, and I 

 good deal depend! upon tbe measurer. I have usually taken this dimension b] 

 means of a thread extended along the bones of the wings to the shoulder-. 



then taken the breadth between tlieru with a pair ofoompi 



If tbe expanse be taken m a straigbl line between tbe tip* of tbe open ■•• 

 it must lie evident thai tbe length of this line will depend on their complete or 

 partial expansion, and in dried ipecimeni it is almost tin possible to have Uicm all 



with the wings in an exactlj similar position, it is on tins secount thai I have 

 adopted tbe method just stated* 



