Geological Society of London. 289 



Geological Sooiett of London. — April 27tli, 1870. — E. A. C. 

 Godwin-Austen, Esq., F.R.S., Vice-President, in the Chair. The' 

 following commnnications were read : — 1. " On the Species of 

 Rhinoceros whose remains were discovered in a Fissure-cavern at 

 Oreston in 1816." By George Busk, Esq., F.R.S., F.G.S. 



The object of this paper was to show that the Rhinoceros, whose 

 remains were discovered by Mr. Whidbey in a fissure-cavern at 

 Oreston, near Plymouth, in the year 1816, and described by Sir ■ 

 Everard Home in the "Philosophical Transactions" for 1817, be- 

 longed, not, as has hitherto been supposed by every one except the 

 late Dr. Falconer, to Bhinoceros tichorMnus, but to Bh. leptorMnus, 

 Cuv. (B. megarhinws, Christol). 



The remains in question are in the Museum of the Royal College 

 of Surgeons, and consist of between thirty and forty more or less 

 broken portions of the teeth, and of numerous bones of the skeleton. 

 The greater number being hardly in a condition to afford satisfactory 

 diagnostic specific characters, the remarks in the paper were limited 

 to the teeth and to a perfect metacarpal bone, which appeared amply 

 sufficient for the purpose. 



The teeth mainly relied upon were the first or second upper 

 molars {m} or m^) of the right and left sides. Both the teeth were 

 broken, but what was wanting in one was supplied by the other. 

 The characters exhibited were shown to be unlike those of B. ticho- 

 rMnus, and quite in accordance with those of B. leptorMnus. These 

 were the thinness and smoothness of the enamel, the configuration 

 of the dorsal surface, the form and size of the columns, and the dis- 

 position and relations of the " uncus " and "pecten" {" crochet " and 

 " anterior combing-plate ;") and the consequent absence of the cha- 

 racteristic " tichorhine pit " or fossette. The less strongly marked 

 characters by which the teeth could be distinguished from those of 

 B. hemitcechus, Falc, and B. etruscus, Falc, were also pointed out. 



The metacarpal bone selected for the illustration of the diagnosis 

 is 9^ inches long, and remarkable for the compression of the shaft, 

 and its comparative slendemess, as contrasted with the same bone 

 in B. tichorMnus, specimens of which were exhibited on the table, 

 and which, in no case within the author's knowledge, ever exceeds 

 7^ or 8 inches in length, and is proportionately much thicker than 

 in B. leptorhinus or any other extinct species. The size and form 

 of the bone also showed that the species could not be either B. hemi- 

 tcechus or B. etruscus, for although the means of direct comparison 

 with the third metacarpal of those species did not, to the author's 

 knowledge, exist in Ijondon, its probable general dimensions and 

 proportions could be deduced from those of the corresponding meta- 

 tarsal, of which bone numerous specimens were available. It was 

 further shown that the Oreston metacarpal exactly corresponded 

 with those of B. lej>torhinus, from Grays Thurrock, in the British 

 Museum. 



