ELEPHANT REMAINS IN CANADA. 143 



of the materials in which they were found. The explorations were suc- 

 cessful. There were found some mutilated and decaying fragments of 

 the skull, two grinders, two patellae, seven or eight ribs, as many verte- 

 brae, and a tusk. Most of these are nearly perfect except the bones of 

 the head. The tusk, though it retained its natural shape as it lay in 

 the ground, yet, being very frail, it was necessary to saw it into four 

 pieces, in order to remove it. 



" The following are the dimensions of the tusks, taken before it was 

 removed from the place in -which it was found : 



Length on the outer curve 10 feet 9 inches. 



" " inner curve 8 " 9 " 



Circumference at base 1 " 9 " 



" 2 feet from base 1 " 10 " 



" 4 feet from base 1 " 11 " 



" 1\ feet from base 1 " TJ " 



" This tusk weighed, when taken from the earth, 180 lbs. The weight 

 of the largest tooth is 8 J lbs. These bones were dug from the bank of 

 a creek, near the water, where they were found under a superincumbent 

 mass of stratified material fifteen to eighteen feet in thickness." (See 

 the 1st Ann. Rep. Geol. Soc. Ohio, p. 97, 1838.) 



In November, 1838, there was published in the Am. Jour, of 

 Sci., vol. 34, p. 362-3, a letter, apparently written by one of the 

 discoverers of the remains in question, in which the difference be- 

 tween the form of the jaw and that of E« pvimigenius was pointed 

 out and illustrated by two figures. His remarks are, in substance, 

 that the jaw of E. Jacksoni "converges more," or is not so 

 broadly rounded in front, and that the symphysial canal is much 

 narrower than in E. primigenius. The figures, it is evident, were 

 only intended for a mere diagramatic illustration, and are 

 therefore not very neatly executed. But taken together with the 

 letter, they constitute a very important contribution to science, as 

 they afford the first proof ever published, that there is in America 

 a fossil elephant different from the European and Siberian E. pri- 

 migenius. 



In the original figure of the jaw of E. Jacksoni, above alluded 

 to, the form of the symphysis and gutter agrees so nearly with 

 that of the corresponding parts of our specimens that no specific 

 differences can be perceived. The molar teeth, represented in 

 their place in the jaw, do not appear to be correctly drawn, as 

 they differ from each other in their proportions and in the number 

 of plates. On the same page, however, there is a figure of the 

 crown of one of the molars, and in the 36th volume of the Journal, 

 p. 190, Mr. Foster gives another and a better one, of the same 



