J. Gunn—Does the Mammoth occur in the Forest-bed 2 457 
same ground, and who has distinguished himself by finding and also 
describing the Cervus latifrons, expresses himself very decidedly to 
the same effect in the Transactions of the Norwich Naturalists’ 
Society. 
It was with amazement that I read the following remarks by Dr. 
Falconer, Palzsontographical Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 471 :—‘‘ But our 
knowledge of the Mammalian species belonging to this extinct 
Fauna in the Forest-bed, regarded as a whole, is still in a very un- 
satisfactory state. ‘The Proboscidea have yielded three well-marked 
species, with indications of probably a fourth: the former being 
Elephas (Loaxodon) meridionalis, E. (Euelephas) antiquus and H. 
(Euelephas) primigenius. The genus Rhinoceros has yielded two 
well-marked species, namely, Rh. Htruscus and Rh. leptorhinus (Kh. 
megarhinus of Christol). It is worthy of remark, that although un- 
doubted remains of E. primigenius have been yielded by the Forest- 
bed, its usual associate in the Quaternary valley gravels, Rh. ticho- 
rhinus, has not as yet, so far as I am aware, been established on 
reliable evidence.” 
Thus he states that undoubted remains of EHlephas primigenius 
have been yielded by the Forest-bed, and that the presence of Ith. 
tichorhinus is not established upon reliable authority. 
I can only say that in the descriptive Catalogue which Dr. Falconer 
made of my collection, the only specimen pointed out by him 
approaching to E. primigenius was No. 223, which he labelled “Old 
type of HE. primigentus.”’ : 
The same may be observed of the specimens in the Norwich 
Museum, and Miss Anna Gurney’s collection, there is not one of 
E. primigenius, except such as have been dredged out at sea, or have 
fallen from more recent beds in the cliffs above; the same also may 
be said with reference to Mr. Rose’s collection, now in the Norwich 
Museum, or Mr. Fitch’s, or Mr. Johnson’s collection, or the Rev. 5. 
King’s in the Jermyn Street Museum. I cannot imagine from what 
source these “undoubted remains of HE. primigenius in the Forest- 
bed” are derived. 
There is another point upon which Dr. Falconer was no less strongly 
assured, namely, that there are no intermediate forms between any 
of the four recognized European fossil species. He asks (Paleeonto- 
logical Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 253), “Do they show any signs in the 
successive deposits of a transition from one form to another? Here 
again,” he adds, “the result of my observation, in so far as it has 
extended over the European area, is that the specific characters of 
the molars are constant in each,” and further, loc. cit., he proceeds to 
show that, ‘‘ according to his numerical formula, there is no room for 
admission of any other forms.” 
The fact is, that Dr. Falconer, having taken a prominent part in 
establishing the recognized species, naturally regarded them with 
almost parental jealousy, and would not tolerate the introduction of 
any intermediate species, or variety. Every specimen found in the 
Forest-bed must be pressed into one or other of them. 
Upon this point I joined issue with my esteemed friend, and I 
